The CR Battle: Are The Republicans Right to Ditch It

Jump to Last Post 1-22 of 22 discussions (92 posts)
  1. GA Anderson profile image81
    GA Andersonposted 7 weeks ago

    Follow the premise of the message. Set aside who the messenger is.

    This CR seems to be politics at its worst—by the drafters of the CR.

    Consider the video's message: The last 'emergency' CR was 21 pages and covered 85 days. This one is 1500+ pages to cover 84 days. And, includes pay raises for Congress.

    And more . . .

    https://hubstatic.com/17305329.jpg

    This CR—as presently understood from media presentations—is a slap to the face. Trump and Musk are right, it's nuts and should be rejected.

    GA

    1. tsmog profile image84
      tsmogposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

      "is a slap to the face."

      Whose face? The voters? I would agree to that.

      It seems there are a lot representatives against it. So, I won't give accolades to Trump and Musk or is it Musk and Trump. Unsure who the leader is these days.

      1. GA Anderson profile image81
        GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        Yep, the slap was to the voters.

        As for who else opposed it; I wasn't offering accolades to anyone, I was simply agreeing with them. Those opposing Representatives are also right but they don't get the headlines.

        The point was as much about the CR's contents as about who speaks against it. Opposing folks aren't talking about the CR (the message), they are talking about the messengers; bad orange man and weirdo billionaire.

        GA

        1. tsmog profile image84
          tsmogposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Okay . . .

      2. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        I think it will become very clear in the next few days. Many of us know we have a voice now, and it’s going to be heard loud and clear. No more status quo. I’m glad to be on the side that embraces that change—because the clash between those who want to keep things the same and those of us who want change will be impossible to ignore over the next four years.

        I think we’re going to see something we don’t often see—Congress will finally recognize the writing on the wall,  and put together a CR that’s free of anything that doesn’t belong.  Yes, they will put up a short fight.

      3. abwilliams profile image68
        abwilliamsposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this
        1. GA Anderson profile image81
          GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Tsk. Tsk. Bare links? Tsk. Tsk.

          But yeah, your link made the point. Also part of that point is that the truth of it is not a partisan thing. Both parties do it. We all do know it. Our politicians (the one's we are blaming) admit it's the truth when it jabs the other party.

          So, 'we' know it (is that a bad assumption?), our politicians verbally confirm it, and the physical proof of the document and its contents confirm it, yet, the national condemnation is of Trump and Musk, and evil conservatives.

          GA

        2. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Too much common sense... Love it!  Your clip is one everyone here should see. Passing a clean CR would be so simple, but the STATUS QUO insists on piling on pork, then running to the media to blame each other, claiming you'll lose your Social Security check if it doesn't pass. and so much more! They drag it out until the last moment, and voilà — it passes. Everyone gets what they want, we're relieved it’s done, and yet more is added to the debt. I voted for change, and I say shut it down! When push comes to shove, shove back.  Not sure that the Republicans in Congress got the message. No more status quo. It has become so predictable one can mimic what will be reported, and what will be said by those who step to the mic to point out blame.

          1. abwilliams profile image68
            abwilliamsposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Yep Shar, sums it up for me, and MOST Americans.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Yes most, but you have some that just seem to not be able to get egg off their faces. And even ask for more.

    2. Sharlee01 profile image83
      Sharlee01posted 7 weeks ago

      "This CR—as presently understood from media presentations—is a slap to the face. Trump and Musk are right, it's nuts and should be rejected.

      GA"

      Looks like Congress did not get the memo! "We the people" are over the status quo! 

      I am frustrated with the current CR—it feels like politics at its worst. The last one was only 21 pages for 85 days, but now we have this 1500+ page bill covering just 84 days, and it even includes pay raises for Congress. It’s hard not to see this as lawmakers trying to slip in things that benefit them while everyone else is just trying to get by. It feels like a blatant example of the system working for the politicians, not the people. On top of that, these bills often include perks for lawmakers to help their own political careers. Like, you’ll see funding for local projects that don't have much national importance but help their districts—things like building new federal buildings or funding for local universities.

      There’s also often subsidies for specific industries, like agriculture or tech, that win support from those groups. And let’s not forget the pet programs or personal initiatives that align with their own priorities, like environmental or research funding, which might not be urgent but definitely help them look good back home. It just feels like a lot of these provisions are about winning votes and securing power, not necessarily about what’s best for the country. It’s frustrating because it makes the whole process seem more about self-interest than real governance. We all know this is the status quo. The question is, do we really want this crap to stop? I do. What about you?

    3. Willowarbor profile image59
      Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

      Musk immediately rejected the bill .  I believe he posted onX more than 100 times overnight. 

      Who is in charge indeed? 

      One lawmaker said office phone lines were flooded with calls from constituents

      “My phone was ringing off the hook,” said Rep. Andy Barr, R-Ky. “The people who elected us are listening to Elon Musk.”

      Musk is pledging to primary those who opposed him .

      Musk's sidekick, Trump, is insisting on raising the debt ceiling.  He has actually been floating the idea of abolishing it...with support of the Democrats of course.  I do believe that idea is in direct opposition to Musk. 

      Welcome to the  Musk presidency, where Trump is now clearly the vice president... I think we are officially an oligarchy.

    4. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 7 weeks ago

      A government shutdown? I say the Republicans can go to hell but they have insulated themselves from being held accountable for it, for now...

      I don't give a damn what that kooky Musk has to say regarding it, there is always 2026 and Republicans will be punished for draconian acts that are included with the Trump agenda.

      But, I will acknowledge one thing, the outrageous pay raises proposed for members of Congress are way out of line.

      1. GA Anderson profile image81
        GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        If they happen to coincide with kooky Musk's view, do you give a damn about anyone's view? How about your own, surely it won't be affected by anything Musk or Trump claims.

        Do you think there is any substance behind the claims of unrelated pork-barrel spending included in a device (the CR) that is only supposed to address temporary government functions?

        Have you considered any of the right-wing pork barrel claims? Was the pay raise the only thing that bothered you?

        I am not for a government shutdown. If the released details, (as implied in the video) aren't a true interpretation, I'll join you in criticizing the orange man and weirdo.

        But if they are true, this rush to do another 'bundled' CR is exactly the 'status quo' thing that has to be changed. It would be a good first step. You should be all for that. Rebuking the 'status quo' is right up your alley.  ;-)

        Check out the claims and then decide what to think of the messenger.

        GA

        1. Credence2 profile image80
          Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          So, GA, why don't you tell me why Trump wanted to strong arm Congress toward a 5 year extension of the debt ceiling when the GOP always attacked the concept under a Democrat's administration? Does that not open the window for wasteful spending?

          I thought that Republicans were fiscal conservatives? I oppose Rep. Shumer and the Democrats if they want to give an exorbitant raise to members of Congress, as I hardly think that they have earned it.

          But, I am not giving Trump anything, if he wants it,  there has to be a sinister purpose behind it.

          Helter-Skelter reigns......

          1. Willowarbor profile image59
            Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Trump, as per usual, says the quiet part out loud.   He would prefer to eliminate the debt ceiling under Biden so he can avoid taking the heat for more government borrowing.   It is most certainly a break from decades of Republican party opposition to raising debt limits.  But they are anticipating Trump’s deficit-exploding plan to extend and expand tax cuts..

            1. Credence2 profile image80
              Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Thanks, Willow, I sort expected this as an explanation or even better, an excuse.

              Regardless, I am not letting Trump off the hook, now or after he takes office. He can expect NOTHING from me.

          2. GA Anderson profile image81
            GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            I'm not defending Trump's demand for a 2-year debt ceiling suspension. I'm against it. It does more than "open the window to wasteful spending," it removes a crucial constitutional protection—the people's control of the purse strings.

            The Republicans do claim the "fiscal conservatives" label, but they only earn it relative to Democrat spending comparisons. By any other measure, they're the twin of Democrats. They just pick different spending 'investments.'

            I'm still optimistic. I don't think Trump will win the debt ceiling fight and I think the final CR will be a lot better than the one we started with.

            This bout of helter-skelter (the CR fight) might be a good thing, in the end.

            GA

            1. Credence2 profile image80
              Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Agreed, except that I am contemplating a blood bath, just thinking about Musk's inane threats against members of Congress who don't "play along"

          3. Ken Burgess profile image68
            Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            If YOUR side is creating trillions in new debt... and creating double digit inflation... its all for a good cause.

            If YOUR side is starting WWIII... it is justified.

            And that is the problem.

            Your side has done tremendous harm the last 4 years... tenfold the harm Trump did during his 4 years... more debt... more wars... more inflation... more social unrest... more migration.

            When a government... an Administration does as badly as this one has... people have to pick the alternative... pick change... because we cannot continue down the road this cabal is taking us down and survive, as a nation or as a civilization.

            We are doomed if we continue down the Biden/Democrat path.

            1. Credence2 profile image80
              Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              You still have not answered the question....

              1. Ken Burgess profile image68
                Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                It kind of does...

                Its why we have a second Trump Administration incoming...

                If you recall the debates and discussion we had back in 2019...

                Prior to Biden being handed the Nomination and the world being turned upside down via a Pandemic and organized riots...

                It was an opportunity to make significant change in the Democratic Party... in our government... that is not what happened.

                The most corrupt politicians and corrupt elements within DC and their supporting Donor Class made sure they regained control of the government with dementia Joe as their stooge.

                And you supported it.  You excused everything they did to prop up Biden as the nominee and then everything they did the last 4 years.

                And this is why Trump is back... we got Trump the first time because people were tired of a government that did not listen to their needs or concerns, spent money recklessly, and shoved change down their throats.

                And when they got back in control with Biden as their front man... they went right back to spending money recklessly (fleecing America) shoving things down American's throats they did not want or believe in, and as an added bonus cranked up WWIII for us to waste trillions on... that has already cost hundreds of thousands of lives to be lost and ultimately will cost millions of lives to be lost (best case scenario).

                Anyone who supported what this Administration has done and tried to keep them in power so they could have another 4 years to make things much worse... they are the problem.

                1. Willowarbor profile image59
                  Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  And how does eliminating the debt ceiling through Trump's term address cutting egg prices?   Asking for millions of folks...

    5. Willowarbor profile image59
      Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

      Musk  didn’t spend $277 million to elect Trump just to be an unofficial advisor.

      He owns him and the Republican party.

      X is going wild.   "President Musk" trending

      1. IslandBites profile image92
        IslandBitesposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

        Rand Paul (R-Ky.) suggested Elon Musk serve as Speaker in a Thursday morning post on X following contentious debates over the continuing resolution (CR).

        “The Speaker of the House need not be a member of Congress . . . ,” Paul wrote.

        Later Thursday, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) said she would be open to supporting Musk to replace Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) in a post quoting Paul.

        “I’d be open to supporting @elonmusk for Speaker of the House. DOGE can only truly be accomplished by reigning in Congress to enact real government efficiency,” Greene wrote on X.

        1. tsmog profile image84
          tsmogposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Yup, with my morning romp on the web yesterday and today were quite a few articles with titles having the prompt, "President Musk" within it or a strong inference for it. Next is a link to a Google University landing page with a firefox browser search, "President Musk". One doesn't have to read too much to get the message by simply reading the article's titles. Even Fox news is in on it.

          However, I read quite a few media sources that is not mainstream or right leaning. Some are Tangle, the Free Press, Reason, and others.

          https://www.google.com/search?client=fi … ident+musk

          The question is is it a distraction? Could it be look here and not there? Or, simply clues to the mystery of Jan 20th, 2025 and the supposed 25 (?) Executive Orders that will alter America for ages to come some say.

          1. abwilliams profile image68
            abwilliamsposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            It's just mainstream media attempting to stay relevant for those who hang on their every word, and fall for their every headline, no matter how sensationalized! 
            It's an obsession, a sordid affair.....

            1. tsmog profile image84
              tsmogposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              Okay . . .

              1. abwilliams profile image68
                abwilliamsposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                P.S. for what it is worth Tim, I don't  count you among the obsessed or among the TDS sufferers. You continually question, but keep an open mind.
                Nothing unhealthy about that. smile

                1. abwilliams profile image68
                  abwilliamsposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  BTW, who did you end up voting for? wink

                  1. tsmog profile image84
                    tsmogposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Well, I almost didn't vote as Ken told me that since I live in California my vote doesn't count. That stumped me since there is some truth to it . . . some. Unsettled I went on a journey crossing the plains of 'I don't know', entered the mountainous ravines of knowledge, and through the lush green valley of ancient wisdom. Still confused and bewildered I reread the Lord of the Rings while pondered the pursuit of Gollum for the ring pondering if it was similar to my quest.

                    Anyway, answering your query, I once again voted for Teddy Roosevelt, perhaps stubbornly while contemplating if only I could give a portion of my vote to the Republican party, the Democratic party, the Libertarians, and the Green party.

                    1. Ken Burgess profile image68
                      Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                      Deserving of recognition... well done.

                2. tsmog profile image84
                  tsmogposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  smile

          2. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            "The question is is it a distraction? Could it be look here and not there?"

            Here’s my take: It feels like the wind has been knocked out of some sails with Trump winning the presidency. All the "Hitler" rhetoric, Project 2025 hysteria, and similar narratives seem to have lost their momentum. It’s like they’re scrambling for a lifeline now, and "President Musk" seems as good a distraction as any. After all, would the left really want to face the brewing problems we’re actually dealing with right now? 

            The" right now" list is long...  Not taking that on.

            1. tsmog profile image84
              tsmogposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              "The" right now" list is long...  Not taking that on."

              Unsure what is meant with the last clause other than there is so much 'actually' happening the first question, in my view, is where to begin. Some of what your perspective pointed out I can agree with except possibly on Project 2025. With my reading it is very relevant today. I pretty much read more 'center' sources that are not mainstream corporate owned media.

              I have even been reading the newsletters of the universities my nephews and nieces attend to get a perspective for the family's younger generation for the holiday get togethers, even though political discussions are taboo at them. They are Auburn, Ole Miss, and Texas A&M. So, of course, there are battles since they all are big football schools.

              1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                I just wanted to add my take on the "President Musk" label that's trending. In response to your point about whether it’s a distraction, I feel it's definitely a "look here, not there" situation. It seems like another smoke screen to draw attention away from what's actually in the CR that Congress is working on, along with many other current issues the White House hopes to keep on the down-low. There are a lot of pressing matters right now that are being overshadowed by these manufactured distractions.

                One example of what I see as a current problem form my list  --- another lie from this administration outed ---- WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States has more than doubled the number of its forces in Syria to fight the Islamic State group — a dramatic increase that the Pentagon revealed Thursday, acknowledging that the added troops have been there for months or even more than a year.

                The U.S. had said for years that there were about 900 troops in Syria, but Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder, the Pentagon press secretary, acknowledged there were roughly 2,000 there now.

                The Pentagon was asked repeatedly about the U.S. presence in Syria in the wake of the chaotic overthrow of Syrian President Bashar Assad on Dec. 8. It did not disclose the increase and instead kept repeating the 900 figure.

                Speaking at a Pentagon press conference, Ryder said the additional forces had been in Syria for months — it’s been going on for a while.”

                But hey, the President Musk thing is really important... Yeah ( I am sarcastic about this administration due to feeling they earned my disdain.) I never look there, but what is smack in front of me,

                1. Willowarbor profile image59
                  Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  Musk came in and tanked a negotiated bipartisan bill.  Trump, seemingly initially unaware, followed Musk's lead.   That's just the reality of what happened.   Musk has bought himself a presidency.  Bought himself a country.  Hey and at quite a bargain, less than what he paid for Twitter.

      2. Willowarbor profile image59
        Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

        Trump wants the debt ceiling lifted...can you say spending spree?? They'll lose a number of Republicans on that demand.   Wonder what Musk's move will be tonight?  He has totally overshadowed Trump.

      3. GA Anderson profile image81
        GA Andersonposted 7 weeks ago

        It's time for a chuckle.

        https://hubstatic.com/17305675.jpg

        That's funny. Stingingly so for some.  And what a great tie-in to RFK Jr. ;-)

        One X post commented that if this new CR fails, the next one will be one page. (wouldn't that be a kicker)

        Until a CR does pass, and the public sees the content, it's just fun and games for me. For now, both sides are full-bore into political posturing. It's wait-and-see time.

        That's okay by me, I think the Republicans have the winning hand—relative to what the public thinks—on this issue. All they have to do is cut the debt ceiling stuff (I wouldn't vote for that either) and their 'stand' matches the majority of the public's election message.*
        *as I see it, of course

        GA

      4. Willowarbor profile image59
        Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

        Republican hypocrisy is bottomless. I love when Chip Roy torches his own party...


        "Roy (R-TX): But to take this bill and congratulate yourself because it's shorter in pages, but increases the debt by $5 trillion, is asinine. And that's precisely what Republicans are doing."

        https://x.com/Acyn/status/1869885899334693088

        Roy is correct. Trump isn't hiding the fact that he wants to add trillions to the debt.  Why the demand to abolish the debt ceiling?  Is that what MAGA voted for?

        Let the infighting begin.

      5. IslandBites profile image92
        IslandBitesposted 7 weeks ago

        First Trump said: “Increasing the debt ceiling is not great but we’d rather do it on Biden’s watch.

        Days later: "Getting rid of the debt ceiling would be the “smartest thing it [Congress] could do. I would support that entirely,” Trump said.

        “Congress must get rid of, or extend out to, perhaps, 2029, the ridiculous Debt Ceiling. Without this, we should never make a deal. Remember, the pressure is on whoever is President,” Trump posted.

        Also,

        Trump said that if the government is to shut down, it should happen while Joe Biden is still president.

        "If there is going to be a shutdown of government, let it begin now, under the Biden Administration, not after January 20th, under 'TRUMP.'

        He cares so much. smile

        1. Willowarbor profile image59
          Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Wait, I thought they were going to save America??

          They are all blameless victims, all the time, even when it comes to trying to govern the nation, why people
          Vote them in is a complete mystery.  Useless.

          On top of it, Republicans slashed $200 million for childhood cancer research, a program created with bipartisan support under Obama—from the CR bill. 



          https://hubstatic.com/17306744.gif

          1. Credence2 profile image80
            Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            A classic " dumpster fire" quite scenic and even more descriptive....

          2. tsmog profile image84
            tsmogposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            "On top of it, Republicans slashed $200 million for childhood cancer research, a program created with bipartisan support under Obama—from the CR bill."

            That sucks!! As a cancer survivor, so far, and supportive of research I can attest the results of research does bring positive results.

          3. GA Anderson profile image81
            GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            Why is cancer research money necessary to keep the government open? I think such funding should be part of a budget process, not an emergency CR.

            What about the DC stadium funding, is cutting that money as inhumane as cutting the cancer money? They're both equally unnecessary to keeping the government open.

            GA

            1. Willowarbor profile image59
              Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              "They're both equally unnecessary to keeping the government open."


              As is suspending the debt limit throughout Trump's term?

              1. GA Anderson profile image81
                GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                The debt ceiling thing is also unnecessary for the purpose of a CR. Hopefully, the '38' Republican dissenters will hold their ground. The restriction of 'the purse strings' is very necessary to a checks-and-balances government.

                So, back to the cancer funding . . . is it wrong to think it should be a budgetary item and not a CR need?

                GA

                1. Willowarbor profile image59
                  Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  "So, back to the cancer funding . . . is it wrong to think it should be a budgetary item and not a CR need?"

                  I don't think it's necessarily wrong. But alternatively  I sure would like to see it passed as a standalone bill.  It will need to be at some other point.. if it can get passed at all.

                  1. GA Anderson profile image81
                    GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    ". . . as a standalone bill."

                    I sure would like to see stand-alone bills too. Currently, it looks like the CR battle is producing the right results.

                    GA

      6. Willowarbor profile image59
        Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

        When you vote for cheaper eggs instead of sound policy you get chaos .

        Unelected, unaccountable billionaire from South Africa, who has never held public office and is, in fact, ineligible to be the American president, appears to have seized effective control of the US government. And he’s done it under the very nose of trump.

        The  right loves to rant about unelected bureaucrats, the so-called “deep state”, making policy. Here we have an unelected billionaire, with a long list of vested interests, haranguing Congress into following his whims and impulses.

        What actually happened was this: Elon lobbied Republicans to ditch the bill, while Trump said nothing. Once it became apparent that Elon had succeeded in killing it, Trump belatedly came out to echo his position.

        That is not authority. It’s a last-minute scramble to save face.

      7. Ken Burgess profile image68
        Ken Burgessposted 7 weeks ago

        The Corrupt Cabal is in a panic...

        Their multi-trillion dollar fleecing of America may be coming to an end...

        Someone might actually get in there and show the American people how many billions were funded to/thru Senator's kids, John Kerry's son, Joe Biden's son... not to mention the trillions wasted in fraud committed by corporations like Boeing.

        Our government is corrupt beyond most people's ability to comprehend... it is almost impossible to have any decency and integrity and work in DC and survive.

        So it will be interesting to see if the Swamp is actually drained this time...

        When they start shipping Senators like Pelosi and Schumer to jail for being traitors to the country, maybe then we can say it is actually being cleaned up, not to mention many bureaucrats that have spent their whole lives gaming it up in DC.

        1. Willowarbor profile image59
          Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Ken,  people voted for cheap eggs not all of this drama.  Not a government shut down.  And there is no appetite and patience for any of this nonsense.

        2. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Ken.... This is a very obvious issue with the Washington Dems.   

          Trump is hoping to get his way on the no-debt ceiling.   

          If I were Trump, I’d definitely want the debt ceiling open heading into a potential second term. It would give flexibility to act immediately on his agenda without getting tangled up in drawn-out negotiations. Think about it—having that financial tool in place would mean he could focus on priorities like the border, infrastructure, tax reforms, or military spending without hitting roadblocks every time he needed funding. He could be off and running.

          It’s also about avoiding the usual gridlock in Congress. Let’s be honest, debt ceiling debates often turn into partisan bickering that wastes time. By suspending the ceiling, he could bypass that and get straight to work implementing policies. Plus, it would let Trump respond quickly to any economic challenges or opportunities—whether it’s dealing with a recession or boosting critical industries.  He is an intelligent human being, that avoids problems, but stays ahead of them. Over the last 4 years, many have become accustomed to having a president causing problems and then ignoring them.

          And there’s the public perception factor. Using the debt ceiling proactively could send a message of strong, decisive leadership, especially compared to the lack of action we’re seeing now under Biden. I’d want to show people I’m not afraid to take the reins and make bold moves to strengthen the country. Having that flexibility in place would be a key part of making that happen.

          I predict Trump will get his open debt ceiling.  It looks like the CR has been cut from over 1,500 pages to 116 pages.  Thank you, Trump!  Did we the people not vote to move away from the status quo?   The status quo has come to a screaming halt.  The Democrats might need to get accustomed to being shoved in a corner. Right where they belong.

          1. Credence2 profile image80
            Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            You should be asking why should Trump get everything he wants without a challenge? I want drawn out negotiations. Why this blank check attitude from the fiscally conservatives Republicans and why the double standard regarding Democrat desire to increase the debt ceiling relative to Trump's desire to do so over an extended period exceeding a year? Why should I consent to that, what is the intent, what is he hiding in his purpose? Now, that is the real question and the real history.

            I welcome the debate as that helps keep everyone in line.

            1. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              "You should be asking why should Trump get everything he wants without a challenge. "Cred

              In my view, He does not get anything without a fight.   I mean what in the world would make you feel he goes unchallenged?  I have never in my life witnessed a man who fights harder and will not take anything lying down. My gosh, what has come to him without a fight?

              You do know Biden mirrored this issue?   ---- In 2021, Biden and congressional Democrats successfully passed legislation to suspend the debt ceiling, allowing the government to borrow as needed without a fixed cap for a period. This measure was seen as crucial to avoid defaulting on existing obligations.

              Biden also sought to suspend the debt ceiling to prevent a government default. In June 2023, he signed legislation that suspended the U.S. government's $31.4 trillion debt ceiling, effectively allowing the government to borrow as needed without a specific cap until January 1, 2025.  REUTERS

              This approach is similar to the one President Trump is advocating for now, where he proposes suspending the debt ceiling to avoid default and manage government borrowing.

              Do you feel Trump should be treated differently? It is expected he will want to come in and be able to hit the ground running, as Biden most likely had hoped to do.

              1. Willowarbor profile image59
                Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                Oh yes, "to manage government borrowing". He'll need a lot of that to make up for the lack of revenue is plans will produce... Specifically the tax cuts and other giveaways

      8. abwilliams profile image68
        abwilliamsposted 7 weeks ago

        How many billions of dollars are we already spending each and every year on "cancer research" and is Big Pharma really on board for a cure?
        It will take a sifting through the nasty, heinous, perverse pork to see what it will take for bent minds, dinosaurs, and RINOS to get on board, "cancer research for children". Ugh, some things never change!

      9. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 7 weeks ago

        Wow! Has anyone taken a moment to consider our history with raising the debt ceiling? It’s worth reflecting on for some context. Let me use a recent example to make the point clear—President Joe Biden and congressional Democrats sought to suspend the debt ceiling rather than set a specific limit. Now, here we are, with former President Trump and some Republicans proposing something strikingly similar.

        Back in 2021, the debt ceiling was suspended until December 2023 as part of a bipartisan agreement to avoid default. This method allows the government to borrow as needed during the suspension period without tying it to a specific cap. It's not a new concept—suspending the debt ceiling instead of raising it to a set number has been a standard practice in modern U.S. fiscal policy to stave off financial crises.

        So, here’s the question: doesn’t Trump deserve access to the same tool if the situation calls for it?

        The real issue here isn’t the policy but the framing. Democrats have historically backed measures to prevent debt ceiling crises, arguing that defaulting on obligations would be catastrophic. On the other hand, Republicans, under Biden, used the debt ceiling debate to push for spending cuts—much like how Democrats approached it during Trump’s presidency. Both sides, when convenient, leverage the debt ceiling to advance their agendas, depending on who holds the reins of power.

        And yet, where is Joe Biden in all of this? He’s the president, but as usual, nowhere to be seen during a crisis. Instead, the media throws a distraction at the public, labeling Elon Musk "President Musk" as some sort of absurd liberal talking point. Forget about Biden’s absence and the chaos unfolding—they’d rather feed the public another label, as if it’s the same thrill they got calling Trump "Hitler." It’s pathetic, but apparently, it will suffice.

        Let me be blunt—it feels like Trump is the one running the show. Maybe that’s what’s driving the media to concoct their latest distraction, a desperate attempt to keep their narrative alive as they hurtle toward irrelevance. It’s all garbage, thrown out for those who refuse to see what’s really going on.

      10. Willowarbor profile image59
        Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

        Can we revisit posts of those on this forum that VEHEMENTLY opposed Biden's signing of the bill to raise the ceiling last year??

        It wasn't okay then but it's okay now...hmmm.

        What happened to fiscal responsibility?

      11. GA Anderson profile image81
        GA Andersonposted 7 weeks ago

        The CR has passed. Trump didn't get the debt ceiling win and the Democrats didn't get the pork. Yet both are on camera claiming a great victory for the American people.

        I think this is a triple win. A win for both parties; the Dems did win the debt ceiling battle, and the Republicans did force a semi-clean CR. Both are wins for the American taxpayers—they got the status quo disruption they were promised. I wonder how many billions were saved by forcing the changes?

        Looks like a good start for the incoming team.

        GA

        1. wilderness profile image88
          wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          I agree - everyone won on this one.

      12. Willowarbor profile image59
        Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

        Musk's first taste of political failure.  I think his actions show he has little idea on how government works or how to govern.   Democrats were able to keep the government open in spite of the chaos he created.   We will have this showdown again in a few months.   Musk will need Democrat votes yet again... I don't think they're going to get them.

        1. GA Anderson profile image81
          GA Andersonposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Musk seems to handle "failure" pretty well. We could use a lot more 'failures' like this one.

          GA

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            I agree—go figure! It seems Elon's input had a noticeable effect on the outcome. The original CR was bloated with pork and came with an enormous price tag. His comment on X appeared to influence reworking it from a massive, costly 1,600-page document down to a much leaner 116 pages, significantly cutting costs. I see the revised CR as a win all around. I feel Musk made his presence felt and accomplished what he set out to do—save taxpayers money. I, too, hope to see more "failures" like this one. LOL!  This man thrives in life, and we see few and far too few with his genius. Glad he is offering his help with attempting to rain in spending, and have a go at paying down the National debt.

            1. Willowarbor profile image59
              Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              The statement was as follows..

              "Musk's first taste of political failure.  I think his actions show he has little idea on how government works or how to govern. "

              A political failure, not a statement about his ability to thrive. 

              Elon Musk won the day! He benefited as substantial (tons) of funds were removed that would have affected his ventures.  He is off on a good foot.

              And this benefits the American people how?   Glad our government's spending bill could benefit him.. I guess... Like I said, welcome to the oligarchy.

        2. wilderness profile image88
          wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Sounds like you're assuming that Musk's objective was to shut down government.  The seems an exceeding foolish assumption.

          1. Willowarbor profile image59
            Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

            He tweeted over a hundred times.... Many calling to "shut it down". He certainly wasn't opposed to a shutdown at any point

            1. wilderness profile image88
              wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

              And the bluff worked.  He won.

              It's really amazing that with all your experience with politics you cannot read what Republicans are saying, instead changing their meaning into whatever evil suits your fancy...while at the same time changing idiotic Democratic statements into wondrous speeches of truth and value.

              Or maybe it is because of your experience dealing with politics; you have become half politician yourself so your words are nothing but efforts to manipulate the emotions of people; truth, honesty and value don't matter.

              1. Willowarbor profile image59
                Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                Or maybe I just take what he says... No manipulation, no motive... Just face value.

                https://hubstatic.com/17308244_f1024.jpg

                Also...

                ″‘Shutting down’ the government (which doesn’t actually shut down critical functions btw) is infinitely better than passing a horrible bill,” Musk wrote in one of dozens of X posts opposing a temporary spending bill. He also said “no bills” should be passed until after Jan. 20 when Donald J. Trump takes office."

                1. wilderness profile image88
                  wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                  He's right, isn't he?  If govt. can't spend the money on things the country needs, shut it down and stop throwing our money away.

                  1. Credence2 profile image80
                    Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    But, I am not shutting everything down just on the terms of some pompous billionaire, like Musk. Who made him lord and master?

                    As I have told you countless times before,  what you and Rightwingers think we need verses my opinion are galaxies apart, so the fight will continue and I don't particularly care what an oligarch like Musk thinks.....

                    1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                      Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                      It seems you might feel that unnecessary items should have remained in the CR.   I think adding projects that aren’t part of "necessary needs" to a Continuing Resolution (CR) is problematic for several reasons.

                      First, it dilutes the purpose of the CR. These resolutions are meant to provide temporary, essential funding, and adding unrelated or non-urgent projects undermines that purpose. It also risks delaying the CR's passage.

                      Second, there’s the issue of lack of scrutiny. Projects that aren’t necessary don’t get the same level of debate or analysis as they would in regular appropriations bills. That can lead to wasteful spending, which is frustrating to see.

                      Third, it damages public perception. Including unrelated projects makes it look like lawmakers are exploiting these urgent funding measures for political or personal agendas, and that erodes trust in government.

                      The idea of CRs was to keep the government running smoothly and pay standing bills. Congress began adding policy riders and unrelated projects to CRs, which has complicated their purpose and sometimes delayed their passage.  As we have witnessed for years.  These additions have turned what was meant to be a straightforward funding measure into a political bargaining tool.  In my view, it's time to rid ourselves of the status quo bad habit, which in the long run adds unnecessary spending to CRs.

                      Congress can address their pork projects in separate bills.  Where each bit of pork could be investigated for its value.

                      It is becoming clear, that breaking the many status quo habits that Trump hopes to do, will be painful to some.  Me, I want true change, the old BS is not working any longer.

                      1. wilderness profile image88
                        wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                        "The idea of CRs was to keep the government running smoothly and pay standing bills."

                        Personally, I don't believe this is true.  While there is zero doubt that is what we were told, I have a really hard time believing that hidden, pork barrel, spending beyond any budget constraints was, and is, the goal.  Our vaunted "leaders" are buying votes with our money, and forcing it through threat of govt. shutdown (which always seems to be merely the things that are most obvious and in-your-face) is the best way to do it unseen.  Besides, both sides can then blame the other, shouting to the heavens that the other side is intentionally shutting down the government. 

                        How long has it been since Congress approved a budget on time, meaning another CR (or more) was needed?  20 years?  30?.  In 40 years, Congress has done it's job with the budget just 4 times.  This is NOT by accident, and it is NOT the work of only Democrats or only Republicans.  It is not because of new wars or massive hurricanes in the last couple of months each year.  It is not because a math mistake was made 40 times. 

                        It is because Congress wants those CR's and will do whatever it takes to get them.

                        https://checkyourfact.com/2023/12/08/fa … -40-years/

                      2. Credence2 profile image80
                        Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                        If have got no issues with the points that you make here, Some how the word got our via Musk that Congress wanted a 40 percent wage when it was actually only 3.5 percent.

                        That is why there is a Congress to debate and come to a conclusion. There are separation of powers in our Government so what Trump and Musk want is not necessarily gospel. Simple fiscal responsibility required a consideration of the debt limit and where we are relative to it whenever the budget is being debated. Trump and his henchmen cannot alter that fundamental principle, that is why so many GOP concerned about setting a bad precedent went against their "fearless leader" and did not comply with Trump's wishes.

                        The "change" Trump is supposed to represent is taking us the wrong direction and it starts even before he takes the oath, in my opinion. The Constitution and its prescriptions are not to be negotiated nor toyed around with. It is "change" that I don't need.

                    2. wilderness profile image88
                      wildernessposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                      Have you even looked at what was taken out of the CR?  Or do you just claim it was justified because it came from liberals?  Or because a Republican (Musk) didn't like it?  Do you even care anymore, or just fight conservatives regardless of what the fight is about?

                      1. Credence2 profile image80
                        Credence2posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                        I saw what was taken out of the CR and the troublesome provision that Trump and the GOP wanted to include.

                        Both sides came to a compromise, you always talk about compromise, is that not the way it should be?

                        I don't like Musk and I don't trust the conservatives as they are  fundamentally duplicitous. It is natural that the left is going have issues with the right. So, I know what the fight is all about, and it's unavoidable because I don't trust "them".

                  2. Sharlee01 profile image83
                    Sharlee01posted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

                    Yes, I'm not sure common sense rings true anymore --- status quo is some mantra. Just keep on printing... LOL  Up is down...

      13. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 7 weeks ago

        The CR was posted online for public review.  It was reduced to 116 pages from the original 1,600, making it much more accessible to read. After reading the CR, the removal of excessive "pork" is definitely a win, as it seems to have cut out unnecessary spending. While Trump didn't achieve his Christmas wish regarding the debt ceiling, it appears that significant savings were realized. Additionally, Elon Musk won the day! He benefited as substantial (tons) of funds were removed that would have affected his ventures.  He is off on a good foot.

        "'Shutting down' the government (which doesn't actually shut down critical functions btw) is infinitely better than passing a horrible bill," Musk wrote in an X post.

        Read the CR, and check out that most of the pork was cut, and the CR clean.
        https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20 … 012.20.pdf

      14. Willowarbor profile image59
        Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

        WEDNESDAY: Trump threatens to primary "Any Republican" who votes for a clean continuing resolution without a debt limit extension.

        FRIDAY: 170 Republicans vote for a clean continuing resolution without a debt limit extension; the bill passes overwhelmingly...

        Will Musk primary these folks? Trump seems to be in direct opposition with him in terms of their beliefs on raising the debt ceiling. Musk is clearly against it and Trump wants to see it raised so he can borrow in order to fund his giveaways...

      15. Willowarbor profile image59
        Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

        So I believe the cr that passed was the same as the 2nd bill minus the debt ceiling demand.   Do Chip Roy's comments ring true?  I thought the "pork" was taken out?  The bill passed with more Democrat votes than Republican.   Just how fiscally responsible is it, by Republican standards?

        "You've added to the debt since you were given the majority again on November 5th. It's embarrassing. It's shameful."

        "Yes, I think this bill is better than it was yesterday on certain respects. But to take this bill yesterday and congratulate yourself because it's shorter in pages, but increases the debt by $5 trillion is asinine."

        "I am absolutely sickened by a party that campaigns on fiscal responsibility and has the temerity to go forward to the American people and say you think this is fiscally responsible."

        "It is absolutely ridiculous."

        I'm thinking that Musk is a fiscal conservative but Trump surely not.  I'm predicting we see yet another splinter in the Republican party...Musk Republicans

      16. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 7 weeks ago

        The pared-down CR includes $100 billion in hurricane relief and $10 billion in aid to farmers, but it excludes certain elements from the original proposal, such as the push to eliminate the debt ceiling. This reduction reflects a clear effort to focus on immediate funding needs, leaving more contentious or expansive provisions for future debates.

        While the exact monetary difference between the original and final CR isn't out as of yet, the substantial reduction in the document's length and the removal of several provisions indicate a significant decrease in proposed spending and policy measures. This streamlined approach was intended to keep government operations running and provide disaster relief while setting the stage for further discussions on spending in the months ahead. One only needs to read the CR to see it covered essentials. I consider this a win for taxpayers, period.

      17. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 7 weeks ago

        Just became aware of some of the pork that was added to the CR---- that was cut. think it's important to have a look at one such bit of bacon!   The provision restricting investments in China was cut.  This bit did not belong in a CR.

        First--- In the context of the U.S. government, a CR refers to a Continuing Resolution. A Continuing Resolution is a type of legislation used by Congress to fund government agencies and programs temporarily when a formal appropriations bill has not been signed into law. They are not for restricting investments via regulation. This would seem to have been a cheap ploy the Dems tried to dangle off the CR.  The Democrats failed to pull this off.  They failed, guess they should be accustomed to failure. There will be plenty to come for this bunch.

        If the provision restricting investments in China had passed in the Continuing Resolution (CR), it could have had several significant consequences for both U.S. businesses and the broader U.S.-China economic relationship.  Many American companies (Approx 40%) with substantial interests in China, especially in sectors like technology, manufacturing, and consumer goods, would likely have faced major challenges. Restrictions on investment could have led to financial losses, disrupted supply chains, and made it harder for companies to access the Chinese market, which is crucial for growth. This would have been particularly damaging for businesses that rely on China for manufacturing or as a consumer base. 

        We should not forget that China is our number one trading partner. To add such restrictions would certainly be unfavorable to our economy, creating more obstacles than solutions. It would have also presented Trump with a major problem on day one, as he strives for better, fairer trade.  His goal is not to cut China out of the picture but to draw a new picture where the playing field is more balanced.  The move would have undermined that objective, potentially limiting flexibility in trade talks and reducing leverage for future negotiations.

        This restriction would have further strained U.S.-China relations. China could have viewed this as an escalation,  and we might have seen retaliatory actions such as restrictions on U.S. companies in China.  This could have intensified the ongoing trade tensions between the two countries and possibly caused broader geopolitical ramifications. On a larger scale, global supply chains would have been affected, as China plays such a pivotal role in manufacturing and providing materials. Companies could have been forced to find alternative suppliers or manufacturing locations, which would have been more costly and less efficient.

        Politically, passing such a restriction could have limited our negotiating flexibility in future trade talks with China. It might have made it harder for the U.S. to use economic incentives like trade access or market opportunities as leverage in discussions. Investors, particularly those with exposure to Chinese markets, might have pulled back, causing market volatility and forcing a shift in investment strategies. Overall, if the restriction had passed, it could have led to economic disruptions, diplomatic tensions, and instability in both supply chains and financial markets.   

        It's evident that the Democrats aimed to immediately undermine Trump with such a regulation. Fortunately, the Republicans succeeded in stopping them in their tracks.  This bunch is vile, they have no respect for "we the people".  It's all about their power, which at this point their power is on life-support.

        1. Willowarbor profile image59
          Willowarborposted 7 weeks agoin reply to this

          Lol I thought we were trying to keep American jobs and innovation out of Chinese hands?  Not anymore?

      18. Willowarbor profile image59
        Willowarborposted 7 weeks ago

        Musk got the only thing that he wanted. Does Trump realize it?

        Musk blew up a bipartisan budget deal with an avalanche of tweets contending that it was too costly, luring Trump into demanding that Republicans kill it. But Musk’s real reason was that the agreement included painstakingly negotiated (mostly by Cornyn of Texas) limits on American tech investment in China.  Had that provision passed, it would have been costly to Musk’s extensive Chinese Tesla operations and future AI plans. 

        The original bill would have made it harder for Musk to build Tesla factories in Shanghai.

        The word for this is oligarchy, and oligarchs don’t think about the country first.

        So the measure at issue is known as the “outbound investment” provision. We have heard for years about the problem of manufacturing businesses shipping jobs overseas to China, with its low worker wages and low environmental standards. China typically forces businesses wanting to locate factories in its country to transfer their technology and intellectual property to Chinese firms, which can then use that to undercut competitors in global markets, with state support.

        Congress has been working itself into a lather about China for years now, and they finally came up with a way to deal with this issue. Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX) and Bob Casey (D-PA) have the flagship bill, which would either prohibit U.S. companies from investing in “sensitive technologies” in China, including semiconductors and artificial intelligence.

        Cornyn-Casey passed the Senate last year, and after about a year of legislative wrangling, a final outbound investment package made it into the year-end bill. “We’re taking a necessary step to safeguard American innovation against bad actors and ensure our lasting dominance on the world stage,” Cornyn said in a statement.

        Funny story: Elon Musk’s car company has a significant amount of, well, outbound investment. A Tesla Gigafactory in Shanghai opened in 2019; maybe a quarter of the company’s revenue comes from China. Musk has endorsed building a second Tesla factory in China, where his grip on the electric-vehicle market has completely loosened amid domestic competition. He is working with the Chinese government to bring “Full Self-Driving” technology to China, in other words, importing a technology that may be seen as sensitive.

        You can argue about whether the U.S. should be restricting investment in China. But it’s incontrovertible that a billionaire who has a bunch of investments in China and wants to make more all of a sudden disrupted a normal congressional process that was going to restrict that investment with a bunch of lies from his media platform. And lo and behold, when the new funding bill emerged, the outbound investment feature was dropped.

        Trump preens as someone determined to “get tough” on China. But he’s empowered someone with serious business entanglements in China to seemingly serve as a barrier to any policies related to China over the next four years.

        Trump scuttled a spending bill primarily to shield the richest man in the world’s investments in China.

        This is going to be a constant theme of the next four years. Personal business interests are going to constantly take precedence over governance in the Trump/Musk White House.

       
      working

      This website uses cookies

      As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

      For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

      Show Details
      Necessary
      HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
      LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
      Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
      AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
      HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
      HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
      Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
      CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
      Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
      Features
      Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
      Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
      Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
      Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
      Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
      VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
      PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
      Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
      MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
      Marketing
      Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
      Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
      Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
      Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
      Statistics
      Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
      ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
      Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
      ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)