Random Thoughts.
There is an accurate emoji showing Jesus standing on the mount saying "Welcome the Immigrant, Feed the Poor, Care for the Sick. while Trump and the evangelicals are standing below Him and to the left pointing their fingers at him screaming "RADICAL LEFT SOCIALIST"
"Fact check: Trump’s false claims to the United Nations"
For those of you who refuse to believe Trump lies all the time, here is a sampling:
* "Trump, repeating a frequent false claim, said, “Since I took office, it has been my great honor to settle eight wars.” - That is a LIE
* “the very same people who said we’ll all be dead in 12 years because of global warming, a name since reborn to climate change because the planet was cooling, not warming, and nobody was dead.” - That is a LIE
* "“We’ve secured commitments for $21 trillion in new investments from all over the planet.” - That is a LIE.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/22/politics … ed-nationsI read the fact check, and I’m not going to argue that Trump sometimes overstates things. I actually think this is where Trump can be his own worst enemy. He takes things that have a factual basis and then pushes the numbers or the wording further than the facts support. He really would have been better off sticking to the facts.
But I think there is another side to this that gets lost when the discussion becomes only about his statements.
When I started looking at the actual investments behind the numbers, I found that a lot of this isn't just money that was announced on paper. Some of these projects are now being built, some are already operating, and some are already producing.
Hyundai’s new Georgia manufacturing plant is open. Toyota has started production at its nearly $14 billion battery plant in North Carolina. First Solar has opened its $1.1 billion Louisiana manufacturing facility and already has hundreds of employees there. Texas Instruments has begun production at its newest semiconductor facility in Sherman, Texas. GE Aerospace is investing another $1 billion in U.S. manufacturing and plans to hire 5,000 more American workers this year.
And then there are the enormous semiconductor projects that are physically moving forward. TSMC now says its total U.S. investment will reach $265 billion, while Micron has already reached major construction milestones on its Idaho and New York projects. Intel is continuing its more-than-$100 billion U.S. manufacturing expansion, and Texas Instruments has more than $60 billion planned across seven U.S. semiconductor fabs.
The latest BEA numbers are significant too: foreign investors spent $121.8 billion on new direct investment in U.S. manufacturing in 2025, accounting for 52.5% of all new foreign investment expenditures that year.
So yes, fact-check the $21 trillion claim. Fact-check the “eight wars” claim. Fact-check the climate statement. I have no problem with that. But I also think we should look at what is actually happening on the ground.
The manufacturing projects, factories, semiconductor plants, aerospace investments and new jobs are real. Manufacturing employment has also increased by 58,000 from its December 2025 low, according to the latest BLS report.
That’s why I think Trump would be much better served by simply telling the truth and letting the results speak for themselves. There is a substantial amount of real activity here that doesn't need to be exaggerated.Trumps whole scenario is to undermine the democracy. This by constantly proclaiming false truths, to undermine the truth. Attacking the free press, attacking the International Court (some court members are unable to use banks anymore as they are put on the black VISA list like a terrorist.)
, attacking institutions in the US that do not align with his view.
All this is a pattern of someone who sees democracies as a danger.And world leaders are too scared to take on America's dictator - Trump.
Implications. It's the reason why Canada wants to join forces with Europe, so it can withstand economic pressure from the US.
Less democratic countries join the US. As birds of a feather flock together.
A country like the UK also has to choose sides. Or it becomes a vassal state of the US completely depended on US AI, or it joins the EU and is part of a counter force against the US and China.
Typical Trump White House. It must be miserable working there.
" Court order to restore media access prompts internal chaos at White House, sources say"
"Multiple White House advisers and officials said Thursday that they had no idea what the plan was after CNN, MS NOW and Politico reporters were repeatedly denied entry to the White House despite a court order — describing a sense of internal chaos.
One official said they had tried to get clarity from senior officials on their stance but questions went unanswered.
“It’s chaotic, no idea,” the official said about potential plans to reinstate the media outlets’ access. Since the court order was issued, a CNN reporter was denied entry to the White House multiple times throughout the day.""Trump’s odd midterm strategy: Give voters the opposite of what they want"
Isn't THAT the TRUTH??
What an incompetent, mentally unstable fool.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/25/politics … an-economy"White House bars CNN from covering Trump on behalf of major TV networks as he travels to Tennessee"
Isn't it time for the judge to hold Donald "the Felon" Trump in CONTEMPT OF COURT and impose a million dollar a day fine?
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/25/politics … ravel-poolMore Outrageous and Depraved behavior from Donald "the Sexual Predator"[/b[ Trump.
[b]" ‘We’re not a sideshow’: Military families blast Trump’s arch observation deck for tourists"
Obviously, Trump thinks military funerals are a Sideshow!
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/25/politics … k-militarySharlee observed that the angst of the Trump era has ruined so many personal relationships. I wrote a Substack article about what I think the reasons are. Since it is too long to post here and I can't make a hub out of it anymore, I posted it at scottbelford.substack.com. It is titled "When it gets personal" if you care to read it.
Scott, I thought this was a thoughtful piece, and I especially liked the personal story because it made the point in a way that statistics and political arguments really can't. I agree with you that politics becomes dangerous to relationships when we start seeing the person on the other side as the enemy rather than someone who simply sees things differently.
Where I struggled a little bit was that I think your own political views came through more strongly in parts of the article than the premise really called for. You talk about how people on both sides can become convinced that the other side is a threat, but then some of the descriptions of MAGA and the fears of Trump supporters seemed to lean toward explaining those concerns as manufactured or exaggerated. I think some of those concerns are genuine, even when I might not agree with every conclusion people draw from them.
That's probably where I see things a little differently. I don't put all Republicans or all Trump supporters in one basket, any more than I would put all Democrats in one. People can support a politician on some issues, disagree with him on others, and still have their own reasons for voting the way they do.
But I do agree with your larger point. Once politics becomes so personal that we can't imagine how someone we care about could possibly see things differently, we've probably lost something important. And your story about the sisters is a pretty powerful example of exactly that. I enjoyed the read...
Shar
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/27/politics … e-midterms
The picture in this article is ironic as hell. It shows a woman with a sign that says Keep America Red!
Here is the irony. In the 1950s at the height of the conservative/Republican Red Scare, that sign would have gotten the author hauled in front of the Subcommittee on Unamerican Activities and probably had had her life destroyed by those standing around her."Trump stirs new storm by posing as strongman in taxpayer-funded video"
One more corrupt act to add as an article of impeachment..
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/28/politics … ment-funds"Former special counsel Jack Smith testifies before Senate Judiciary Committee"
Just in time for Jack Smith to remind the voters of what a corrupt man Donald "the Felon" Trump is.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/29/politics … ies-senate"FBI grapples with fallout from massive data breach"
Is ANYONE really surprised about this? Donald "the Felon" Trump has spent the last two years dismantling America's counterterrorism infrastructure!!
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/28/politics … ch-hackingSo Hollywood and Tom Cruise got it wrong, just any ole body can hack the government?
And all because of President Trump?
Now that prompted a grin and a mental image involving Red Bull. ;-)
GA
Just a random thought ...
This popped up:
This resonated so quickly.
(faintly a voice asks; How quick was it?)
It was so quick that I worried about falling into a stereotypical response about today's youngsters, maybe muttering one of those 'passing generation vs coming generation' clichés we've all heard.
But ... did you see the recent national polls about the Democrats' favorable view of socialism?
What the hell?
GAGiven my "what's best for humanity" point of view I don't have a real issue with theoretical socialism. It is oriented around helping the society function better. In practice, it does not do as well as regulated capitalism. But, it generally has better outcomes for people than unregulated capitalism.
I don't view communism or fascism as variations of socialism, they are simply dictatorships who serve the rulers, not the people. That is the same path I see Trump on which is why it is so important that Democrats get a blow out in the midterms.I think this is where the discussion gets a little too theoretical. “Socialism” has a long and complicated history, and its real-world results can't really be evaluated by simply saying it is designed to help society, while regulated capitalism works better in practice. Intentions and historical outcomes are two different things.
I also think it's important not to separate socialism, communism, and fascism simply by saying the latter two are dictatorships. Historically, different socialist systems have also existed under highly authoritarian governments, and some of the worst economic and humanitarian outcomes of the 20th century occurred under governments that claimed socialist or communist foundations. At the same time, modern Western countries generally operate mixed economies that combine private enterprise with substantial government programs and regulation.
So I think the more useful question isn't whether a system sounds good in theory. It's what actually happened when particular economic systems were put into practice, what institutions accompanied them, and what the measurable results were. That's where the historical record becomes much more important than the label.It is Trump and his supporters who are calling ALL Democrats socialist and communists (two entirely different things, btw). Setting communism aside, which is more akin to what Trump is trying to establish, and look at why some Democrats, including me, look approvingly on socialism.
I would argue that when presented with the term, they aren't thinking socialism in practice, which has done a lot of good when it still was socialism and not a dictatorship, even though it did suppress some individual freedoms that we take for granted here. That is what I think they are responding to when combined with all the harm unregulated capitalism has caused.I think we're talking past each other a little.
I'm not saying that every Democrat is a socialist, and I'm certainly not saying that wanting to help people makes someone a socialist. I'm talking about the actual philosophy behind socialism and what has happened when governments have tried to put those ideas into practice.
You say socialism did a lot of good “when it still was socialism and not a dictatorship.” That's actually where I disagree with you most. I don't think the failures of socialism can simply be blamed on the fact that some socialist governments became dictatorships. The economic system itself involves increasing government control over property, production, prices and the distribution of wealth. And once government takes on that much control, individual economic freedom necessarily becomes much more limited.
I think this is where the Democratic Party is at a very important crossroads.
Democrats are trying to regain control of Congress this November, but they are also having to decide what kind of Democratic Party they want to be. Some of the candidates coming forward are far more radical than what many Americans have traditionally thought of as mainstream Democrats.
I'm not saying every Democrat agrees with them. In fact, I would expect that a significant number of traditional and more moderate Democrats would resist some of the more extreme proposals if these candidates were elected. That could mean a great deal of internal fighting and congressional gridlock rather than actually being able to put all of these ideas into practice.
But that's also what makes this such a gamble for the party.
If Democrats embrace candidates and policies that move substantially farther toward government control, wealth redistribution and the dismantling of institutions such as traditional law enforcement and the prison system, they are taking a chance on a very large political and economic experiment.
And this is where history matters to me. Venezuela was an extraordinarily wealthy country with enormous oil resources. It had the financial ability to support ambitious social programs. Yet as the government increasingly took control of the economy, nationalized industries and interfered more heavily with markets, the country ultimately suffered an extraordinary economic collapse. That history shouldn't simply be dismissed as “it failed because there was a dictator.” The economic policies themselves deserve examination.
So I'm not predicting that America would become Venezuela. I'm saying that when a political party moves toward policies that have never been demonstrated on anything close to this scale in the United States, there are consequences to consider.
The Democratic Party may believe this is the path to regaining power. But I see it as a genuine gamble. If the experiment doesn't produce what its advocates promise, the consequences may not just be the failure of individual policies. It could create a much larger backlash against the party itself and force Democrats to reconsider the direction they chose.
That's why I don't think we should simply look at these proposals and say, “They want to help people, so how could that be bad?” Good intentions are not enough. The bigger question is what happens when those ideas become government policy.You are probably right about talking past each other. We need to establish some definitions. What kind of socialism is Trump talking about? Is that different from what you are talking about?
What I have in mind as a largely socialist country are the Nordic states and England, especially England from 1945 to 1970.I think defining the terms is exactly where we need to start. When Trump talks about “socialism,” he often lumps together socialism, democratic socialism, communism and social democracy, even though they are not the same thing.
The Nordic countries you’re referring to are actually capitalist market economies with private ownership, combined with extensive government-funded social programs. They are generally described as social democracies, not socialist planned economies. Keep in mind all are very small Nations.
England from 1945–1970 is a somewhat different example. The Labour government nationalized major industries, including coal, rail, energy, and steel, but Britain still had a large private sector and operated as a mixed economy.
Where I think the discussion gets more complicated is with some of the candidates and organizations further to the left who are running in the November 2026 elections. The Democratic Socialists of America’s current platform goes considerably beyond the Nordic model. It calls for universal rent control, Medicare for All and a Green New Deal, but also proposes abolishing the Senate and fundamentally restructuring the Supreme Court and presidency, as well as the police and ICE... One must admit they are not hiding their ideas; yes, some are attempting to walk some of their statements back. I myself never buy walkbacks.... Are you on board with the candidates that are very open with what they hope to accomplish?
And there are individual Democratic candidates whose stated positions go even further. For example, Darializa Avila Chevalier identifies as a democratic socialist, and reporting on her deleted social-media posts found statements supporting “seizing the means of production” and favorable references to Marxism and communist leaders. She has said she is a democratic socialist, not a communist.
So I agree that we need to define what we're talking about. If you mean the Nordic model, capitalism, private ownership, and a strong social safety net—that is one discussion. If you're talking about government ownership of production or some of the much more radical proposals coming from parts of the democratic-socialist movement, that is a very different discussion.
That distinction is important before either of us simply calls something “socialism” or “communism.”
In my view, we do not need a disruptor in Congress; we already have plenty.
Sure, it's just a semantics argument.
It's like you said, theoretically, socialism is the most equitable system. It just hasn't been done right, yet.
Fortunately, the point wasn't about the difference in the mechanics of the named "systems"; your segue wasn't legit. No Trump needed on this one. ;-)
Try this: consider the 1985 picture just as it is, but envision the 2026 picture as 1960 with Hippi/anti-war style students instead of the 2026 activists.
GAAre you suggesting that the Hippi/anti-war crowd was what American society was in the 1960s? Or were they a small microcosm of society who happened to oppose the war in Vietnam?
The illustration was intended to be the older generation's view of the direction the younger generation was promoting.
For the hippies/anti-war younger generation, the older (and judging) generation would have been the WWII survivors. For the '2026 activists,' the older generation would be the Baby Boomers that survived the world's histories of the Cold War era - Russia, China, etc.- the generation that witnessed the effects of real communism and real socialism in practice, not in theory.
GAI got to be getting old. When I read "real communism and real socialism", neither 'real' seemed to be spelled correctly and I had to think on it. Sheesh.
To me, this shows how much the wording and context of a poll question matter. In the very same Gallup poll, 65% of Democrats had a favorable view of “socialism,” but 65% also had a favorable view of “free enterprise.” Those two concepts have very different historical meanings. So I think it’s fair to question what respondents actually understand “socialism” to mean. A quick answer to a broad, undefined poll question doesn’t necessarily tell us much about what people actually believe.
Yes, I think it raises a broader question about how we form opinions in a society where people are constantly asked to react quickly to complicated subjects.
The Gallup example doesn't tell us that people are uninformed, but it does illustrate a potential problem: people can respond to a political or economic label based on what that word means to them personally, rather than on a commonly understood definition. And when those answers are then reported as a percentage, the result can sound much more definitive than the underlying question really was. Yes ---"what the hell".You hit a spot with that one: free enterprise vs. capitalism. It looks possible we've seen similar sources. One of them was promoting the substitution while noting the poll results as validation.
I don't like it. Euphemisms are placaters, deceits. They're a manipulation. An undocumented immigrant is still an illegal alien. An unhoused person is still a homeless guy. And free enterprise is still capitalism.
*I think I first heard this from Dan Mitchell, but I'm still calling it appeasement.
GAI think that may very well be the same trail of sources we were following. And I understand your point about “free enterprise” being used in place of “capitalism.” I can see why you would regard that as more than just a change in wording.
But actually, that gets me back to the point I was making about the poll. If people can hear “capitalism” and “free enterprise” and attach somewhat different meanings to them, then the same thing can happen with the word “socialism.”
Gallup actually did a follow-up on this. They asked people, in their own words, what they considered good and bad about capitalism, free enterprise and socialism. What I found interesting was that Gallup itself found the public doesn't think of capitalism and free enterprise in exactly the same terms. Capitalism was much more likely to bring up inequality, while free enterprise was more likely to bring up economic freedom, competition and choice.
So I'm not saying the words are necessarily different economic systems. I'm saying that **people don't necessarily hear the labels the way we do**. And that's why I hesitate to take a number like “65% favor socialism” and assume all 65% are envisioning the same thing.
That’s really the part of the Gallup poll that made me say “what the hell?” in the first place.I'm missing something. You sound like your point is that folks can hear (or hold) different meanings for the same words, ie., capitalism and free enterprise, or socialism.
Well, yeah, that was my point. Relative to capitalism, "free enterprise" is essentially a euphemism, but, in perception, it is not synonymous — the difference being the negative connotations you mentioned.
Relative to seeing socialism differently, the point was that it was from a generation with lifetime (in a, not of a) experience of the concept in real-life existence, compared to the newest generation's 'theoretical' understanding of the concept.
Maybe the Gallup poll you mention is proof of my point. There is no logical reason for folks to perceive capitalism and free enterprise differently—without manipulation or purposeful deception.
I'm probably overreacting. The euphemism idea just seems 'shifty' to me. And the idea of 'textbook activists' seems dangerous as hell.
GAI don't think you're missing my point; we may actually be closer in agreement than it sounds.
I agree that people can attach very different meanings to the same political labels, and I also understand why you see “free enterprise” as a euphemism for capitalism. Where I hesitate is the leap from people perceiving the terms differently to assuming that the difference must come from manipulation or purposeful deception.
The Gallup follow-up is interesting to me precisely because it shows that people weren't simply choosing labels at random. When they were asked what they actually meant, “capitalism” brought up things like inequality much more often, while “free enterprise” brought up economic freedom, competition and choice. Those are real differences in how people perceive the terms, even if the underlying economic system overlaps.
And I think that's also why I'm cautious about interpreting the 65% socialism number too literally. If people of different generations—and even people within the same generation- are attaching different ideas to “socialism,” then that percentage doesn't necessarily mean 65% of Americans want the same economic system.
So I think we're actually making a similar observation from slightly different angles. You're concerned that changing the label can change people's perception of the underlying idea. I'm saying the poll itself gives us reason to be cautious about assuming everyone who chooses a label means the same thing by it.
And I agree with you on one thing pretty strongly: if someone is deliberately changing terminology to make an unpopular idea sound more appealing, that's worth questioning.
"Suspect in alleged plot against British base called police before arrest, UK media report"
Each day this "terror" plot keeps getting weirder and weirder and is beginning to look like "much ado about nothing".
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/30/uk/suspe … d-intl-hnkThis is what CORRUPTION looks like.
"Trump’s ads have cost taxpayers at least $2.5 million, with funding from Customs and Border Protection"
Enough said.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/29/media/tr … on-fundingWell ... I didn't need the link for this one.
You're right; it is wrong. There might be an argument as to whether it is "corruption," but it's not one worth having. This action stinks.
What stinks more is that there's probably nothing that can be done about it in the 'short term' (before the midterms).
GAProbably not after the midterms either. The most that might happens is it becomes another Article of Impeachment.
"UK says ‘strong indication’ Iran was involved in incident at air base housing US forces"
This is getting SOOOO confusing.
Here is what I understand.
1. Some UK nationals, some wearing hoodies, were standing around some vehicles near an air base housing US forces. A local sees this, thinks it suspicious and calls it in.
2. Apparently, one of the men had called police maybe an hour earlier and reported something, I am not sure what.
3. After the local call police rushed to the scene, which according to the latest story, they were already at, maybe from the first call by one of the men arrested.
4. Then the whole lot are arrested on explosives charges. except there were no explosives found, it seems.
5. And now they are saying Iran is behind it all.
As I said, I am confused.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/30/uk/suspe … d-intl-hnkThis is not the real (yes, that is the spelling it seems) America I grew up in and served. It sounds very much like Putin, or Un, or Xi, or Maduro, or the Ayatollah was president.
"Trump administration escalates feud with federal judges"
"The Justice Department filed a judicial misconduct complaint against nearly all the federal judges in Minnesota, Attorney General Todd Blanche announced on Wednesday, escalating tensions between the Trump administration and the judicial branch.
The administration’s demand that the judges be disqualified from immigration-related cases was prompted by a recent New York Times article in which six federal judges described the Justice Department’s failure to comply with court orders during an immigration-enforcement surge as a grave threat to the rule of law."
So, once again people, judges in this case, are punished for speaking the truth.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/30/politics … es-blanche"Trump administration shifts funds from human rights to supporting far-right causes"
No Surprise There, is there? For Trump, Human Rights is the enemy of the people.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/10/02/politics … ght-causesYou can criticize the administration’s decision, but “Human Rights is the enemy of the people” is a political opinion, not a fact established by this story. The actual issue is more specific: the administration redirected millions in taxpayer-funded democracy money toward causes it considers priorities, including anti-communism, migration, and “Western civilizational norms,” despite congressional objections. Do none of those issues concern you? Or is the only thing that matters to you the opportunity to attack Trump?
"Trump fights on home turf as Democratic midterm hopes rise"
GEE, I wonder why? Could it be the absolutely horrible job the CORRUPT Trump and his minions did? Enjoy your high gas prices, they are around to stay for a while.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/10/05/politics … -home-turf"Trump is clearly trying to buy votes with taxpayer money"
Does ANYONE really doubt it given how corrupt he is?
"President Donald Trump is ramping up his efforts to use taxpayer money and resources to help Republicans win the 2026 midterm elections.
And it’s not at all subtle.
At last month’s Republican midterm convention, he severely pushed the envelope by promising every adult US citizen $5,000 if Republicans hold both the House and the Senate. That was already stunning — to offer voters money for a specific outcome. But Trump has only continued pushing the envelope since then.
Over the last 10 days, he has run more than a dozen different government-funded ads that are geared toward promoting himself and his supposed accomplishments.
The road to the 2026 midterms starts now
Each week, Aaron Blake cuts through the political noise with sharp analysis of the races, candidates and trends that could decide control of Congress. Sign up for 20/26 Vision, a weekly newsletter focusing on this year’s midterms.
Last week, Trump held two separate White House events in which he made exaggerated promises about major economic projects in key states holding crucial Senate races.
Also last week, the administration sent $500 checks to nearly 1 million Obamacare recipients.
By Friday, the administration apparently found yet more money to send out: $90 for around 20 million senior citizens to help pay for their Medicare Part B premiums.
And in recent days, Trump has re-upped his $5,000 pitch on social media and featured it prominently at rallies in Alabama and Oklahoma."
https://www.cnn.com/2026/10/05/politics … y-midterms"Democrats are taking big chunks of GOP voters in key Senate races, polls show"
I adjusted for the 2022/2024 polling error and determined that there is a very HIGH likelihood that 1) Ds keep all their seats and 2) pick up four more to get to 51,
https://www.cnn.com/2026/10/06/politics … ver-voters"Christa Pike’s attorneys call recovery ‘medically unprecedented’ ahead of hearing over botched execution"
Personally, I am not opposed to the death penalty - when it is fairly and evenly applied. For example, Trump wanting Hasson to be killed by firing squad is perfectly fine with me.
In this case, however, it was not applied fairly and evenly. At the very least, her sexual abuse should have been presented but was not. Second, there have been thousands of murders with her circumstances where the murderer was given sentences of life with the possibility of parole and NOT botched death by lethal injection. This attempt to kill her should never had happened, in my opinion.
I agree that the governor should commute her sentence but to one with the possibility of parole.
https://www.cnn.com/2026/10/07/us/chris … -tennessee
Related Discussions
- 50
random thoughts please
by ByChanceTV 15 years ago
Please post your 'Random' Thought here please..."Sometimes I taste like Polkadots"
- 85
Random Thoughts and Words of Wisdom
by P1 SpareNone 16 years ago
Ever had a simple question pop in your head that defies common sense? Do you have random words of wisdom that you wish to share with others? Or have you heard someone else say/express something similar to this? I have these sorts of things happen all the time, and I would like to...
- 6
NBA Playoffs 2013 Random Thoughts!
by Julio E Olmo Sr 13 years ago
The first round of the playoffs this season is not looking good for any of the road teams at alll. Injuries have played a huge part on the no-drama!
- 46
Random Facts of the Day!!!
by pinkylee 16 years ago
I have these moments throughout my day that totally random things po into my head. as my boyfriend would call it "randon fact of the day" so I thought I would start sharing them with you all and see what other randon facts of the day people have. This could prove to be funny. so my...
- 11
Random Thoughts about HubPages
by Phyllis Doyle Burns 13 years ago
There has been a lot of complaining about changes, unfeatured hubs, ads, etc. I, too, have made some complaints -- yet, I do intend to stick it out and hang in here, for I have faith that HubPages is a good place to be, for me, anyway. I think HubPages will only grow better over time.I do,...
- 358
Trump's Big Beautiful Bold Agenda to Reclaim America
by Sharlee 11 months ago
President Trump is back in the White House as our 47th President, and let me just say: he’s not wasting a single second. From the moment he took the oath again, he’s been fighting to restore American strength, pride, and sanity. This second term isn’t about revenge; it’s about results. And we’re...