Hannah Neeleman, dubbed “the tradwife queen” (Ballerina Farm)

Le rêve pionnier est profondément ancré dans la culture et l’histoire américaine. C’est simple mais puissant : se lancer dans l’inconnu, avec seulement quelques affaires et votre famille proche, et créer un foyer autonome et florissant dans un environnement impitoyable. Comme le montre la série (maintenant annulée de manière retentissante) La Petite Maison dans la prairie de Laura Ingalls Wilder, c’est un rêve qui nécessitait des compétences pratiques, de la force physique et de la force mentale.
C’était aussi, toujours, plus facile à vendre aux hommes qu’aux femmes, c’est pourquoi les pionniers devaient souvent obtenir une épouse par correspondance. Ce qui pour un homme pourrait être une aventure pionnière pourrait être, pour sa femme, une corvée quotidienne ardue de cultivation et de préparation de la nourriture, de confection et de réparation de vêtements, de lessive, d’élevage d’animaux, et ainsi de suite, le tout sans aide familiale et avec plusieurs enfants dans les pattes.
Au fil du temps, cependant, une série d’innovations – des voitures aux aliments en conserve en passant par les appareils ménagers facilitant le travail – ont rendu la vie de plus en plus facile à vivre de façon en apparence autonome. Peut-être surtout, cela a libéré les femmes pour poursuivre leurs rêves individualistes tout comme les hommes. Comme l’antiféministe américaine Phyllis Schlafly l’a un jour observé, les femmes ont été plus libérées par la machine à laver que par le féminisme.
Mais que se passe-t-il si quelque chose avait été perdu, alors que la corvée disparaissait ? C’était l’avis peut-être du critique de la technologie le plus controversé de l’époque moderne : le défunt mathématicien et terroriste domestique Ted Kaczynski, communément connu sous le nom de ‘Unabomber’. Dans son manifeste, Kaczynski a soutenu que, à mesure que la ‘société industrielle’ se développait, elle corrodait la liberté humaine, laissant derrière elle des individus affaiblis, inhibés et ‘trop socialisés’ incapables d’exercer pleinement leur pouvoir. Il était tellement opposé à cette dégradation perçue qu’il a mené une campagne de vandalisme anti-technologique et d’envoi de lettres piégées qui a tué trois personnes et en a blessé 23 autres.
Évidemment, je ne cautionne pas le terrorisme. Mais il y a quelque chose dans l’idée que les appareils ménagers nous ont privés de compétences pratiques, nous rendant plus dépendants de leurs services et de leur infrastructure, même s’ils nous déchargent de l’effort. Mais si vous ne pouvez pas séparer le libre-arbitre de l’effort, qu’est-ce que cela implique pour toutes ces mères condamnées à la corvée ? Cette tension alimente une grande partie du pouvoir, et aussi de la controverse, entourant la figure culturelle très contemporaine de la ‘tradwife’.
Sur les réseaux sociaux, ces influenceuses documentent leurs travaux en tant qu’épouses et mères. Ce faisant, elles font une vertu de s’ajouter des tâches domestiques que les générations précédentes de femmes avaient pris plaisir à éviter dans leur vie. Et cela invite à la réflexion. Avec un message aussi réactionnaire, pourquoi leur contenu est-il si populaire ? Kaczynski avait-il raison sur la nécessité d’échapper à une société industrielle ‘trop socialisée’ ? Et si c’est le cas, qu’est-ce que cela signifie pour les femmes ?
Parmi ces figures, aucune n’est plus populaire – ou, récemment, plus controversée – que Hannah Neeleman, surnommée ‘la reine des tradwives’ dans une récente interview virale du Times. Sur sa chaîne de médias sociaux Ballerina Farm, Neeleman documente l’esthétique terreuse, la vie agraire et le ‘retour à la terre’ coûteusement stylisé qu’elle apprécie avec son mari, l’héritier de la compagnie aérienne Daniel Neeleman, et leurs huit enfants sur une ferme de 328 acres dans l’Utah. Mais si la popularité, les produits et les controverses de Neeleman nous apprenent quelque chose, c’est que ni Phyllis Schlafly ni Ted Kaczynski ne sont de bons guides pour le phénomène des tradwives.
Dans l’interview du Times, l’auteure Megan Agnew décrit la vie domestique de Neeleman avec une insinuation claire que quelque chose ne va pas. Elle laisse entendre que Neeleman embellit peut-être une vie de labeur avec un mari autoritaire; après tout, elle a renoncé à une place dans une prestigieuse école de ballet pour une grossesse pieds nus et l’élevage de porcs. Peut-être aussi a-t-elle été poussée par le même mari autoritaire à refuser des anti-douleurs pour ses nombreux accouchements à domicile. Et peut-être que ses propres réalisations ont été mises de côté et son potentiel jeté aux oubliettes: Agnew détaille les costumes de ‘reine de beauté’ jetés dans le garage, ainsi que la salle que Neeleman voulait comme studio de danse mais qui a été transformée en salle de classe à domicile.
Agnew observe qu’elle a à peine un moment pour parler à Neeleman sans être interrompue par les tout-petits, ou coupée par Daniel. Où, nous sommes invités à nous demander, cette belle femme douée peut-elle être une personne, au-delà d’être une épouse et mère dévouée? Depuis la publication de l’interview, elle a suscité une vague de spéculations sur la santé de son mariage et la signification du tablier au motifs d’œufs d’anniversaire, ainsi que de la la compassion pour sa condition opprimée évidente, ou encore une défense tout aussi animée de son style de vie (y compris de Neeleman elle-même).
Alors, que se passe-t-il vraiment à Ballerina Farm? Hannah Neeleman est-elle opprimée? A-t-elle vu son rêve lui être volé? Ce qui est présenté dans les médias sociaux diverge souvent de la réalité, et il est bien sûr véridique que des relations qui semblent affectueuses peuvent avoir des dynamiques moins heureuses en coulisses. Certains mariages prétendument ‘trad’ sont vraiment abusifs. Cependant je ne suis pas au courant de telles rumeurs sur Ballerina Farm, et je n’ai aucun intérêt à alimenter les spéculations.
Mais que dire de la structure de la situation de Neeleman? Le simple fait qu’elle ait été détournée de son rêve de devenir une prima ballerina pour une vie de domesticité agraire, enceinte tous les 18 mois et assiégée par des tout-petits collants et les tâches de la ferme, révèle une femme ‘abusée’ dont la chance d’auto-réalisation dans le ‘processus de pouvoir’ a été volée par un homme dominateur?
Cependant, cela passe aussi à côté du point de Ballerina Farm dans son ensemble: un point que ni les sauveteurs féministes potentiels de Neeleman ni les défenseurs traditionalistes n’admettent pleinement. À première vue, oui, le cadre semble étonnamment antiféministe. Mais si vous prenez comme message non seulement le contenu des publications sur les médias sociaux mais l’ensemble du projet Ballerina Farm, Hannah Neeleman n’émerge pas comme classiquement ‘opprimée’ ou ‘émancipée’. Plutôt, elle apparaît profondément ancrée dans son travail de vie, d’une manière qui ne se superpose pas facilement à la vision libertaire pionnière de style Kaczynski ou au monde high-tech qui a émergé de cette vision pour ‘libérer’ les femmes dans le sens Schlafly.
La suspicion dirigée contre la ‘tradlife’ est correcte dans ce sens: si Kaczynski avait gain de cause et que la société industrielle disparaissait demain, cela pourrait bien redonner une certaine agence pratique aux hommes individuels par rapport aux bureaucraties et aux structures sociales complexes. Mais cela retirerait également la majorité des femmes de la vie publique, dans la routine quotidienne des tâches de subsistance avec les enfants.
Tous les aspects les plus controversés du discours de Ballerina Farm sont animés par cette intuition. Par exemple, l’interview du Times et son essaim de répondants sur TikTok et X ont tous beaucoup insisté sur le fait que les Neelemans n’ont pas de nourrice pour aider avec les plus petits enfants, car Daniel n’en veut pas. Ce détail est cohérent avec l’image de pionnier autonome, mais évidemment un fardeau plus lourd pour Hannah que pour Daniel. Également cohérent avec le style de pionnier ‘faire cavalier seul’, la plupart de ses bébés sont nés à la maison, sans anti-douleurs. Dans quelle mesure était-ce son choix? Qui sait?
Mais peut-être que la vraie question est : à quel point leur vie est vraiment ‘pionnière’ de toute façon? Le style Petite maison dans la prairie robuste et autonome n’est crédible que tant que vous ne vous demandez jamais : qui filme? Je peux apprécier de regarder Neeleman préparer un ‘déjeuner d’été parfait‘ de pains plats au levain, pesto et fromage entièrement à partir de zéro, y compris la fabrication et l’égouttage du fromage, car je choisis de passer outre le fait évident que tout est fabriqué pour les caméras. Faire tout cela serait une quantité de travail insensée juste pour le déjeuner, pour quelqu’un avec huit enfants et des tâches agricoles, à moins qu’elle n’ait beaucoup d’aide.
‘Le style Petite maison dans la prairie robuste et autonome n’est crédible que tant que vous ne vous demandez jamais : qui filme?’Mais, de manière très évidente, elle a beaucoup d’aide. Pour commencer, avec des valeurs de production aussi bonnes, il y a probablement une équipe sur place pour aider avec l’éclairage, le tournage, le montage et la publication de ses créations culinaires d’apparence entièrement naturelle. Neeleman elle-même a détaillé leurs 30+ employés, et a partagé des images de l’espace (beaucoup moins artistiquement stylé) où les Oompa-Loompas de Ballerina Farm emballent et expédient les produits de la marque alimentaire et de style de vie multimillionnaire dérivée de l’émission. Leur ferme-maison-studio est clairement une ruche d’activité et de personnes, tout le temps. Comme le note l’interview, il y a aussi des femmes de ménage, ainsi qu’un tuteur à domicile pour éduquer les enfants plus âgés.
Non, Hannah Neeleman n’a pas de nourrice pour les bébés. Mais nourrice ou pas, il ne manque pas de personnes pour surveiller une foule d’enfants. Ce n’est pas La Petite Maison dans la Prairie, sans personne à des kilomètres à la ronde sauf Maman et Papa et la marmaille. Et ce n’est pas non plus, comme le prouve le fait que les deux Neelemans sont activement impliqués dans l’entreprise Ballerina Farm, une configuration domestique ‘traditionnelle’ sur le modèle ménagère-gagne-pain.
Cette séparation entre mari travailleur et épouse dépendante, souvent glossée comme la partie ‘trad’ dans ‘tradwife’, date de l’ère industrielle. C’est-à-dire : ce n’est pas du tout ‘traditionnel’, mais distinctement moderne. C’est aussi le modèle qui, avec le temps, a alimenté bon nombre des insatisfactions contestées par le féminisme. Mais Hannah Neeleman n’est absolument pas une ‘tradwife’ dans ce sens : plus précisément, elle est une tradewife : une mère qui travaille au sein d’un foyer économiquement productif.
Ballerina Farm est à la fois un foyer et une entreprise bien gérée et évidemment rentable. En elle, Daniel et Hannah occupent des rôles distincts mais tout aussi vitaux. C’est un mode de vie qui ressemble plus étroitement à l’ère prémoderne qu’à quelque chose de ‘trad’ dans le sens de ‘tradwife’. Mais ce n’est pas une tentative de revenir à l’ère préindustrielle non plus. Au contraire, Ballerina Farm n’est possible que parce que ce n’est pas un projet low-tech sur le modèle de l’Oncle Ted.
Après tout, rien de tout cela ne serait possible sans internet : l’agriculture de Daniel Neeleman existe en symbiose avec l’agriculture “d’engagement” de sa femme. Contrairement aux nombreux agriculteurs malheureux vivant au jour le jour alors que les supermarchés réduisent leurs marges, Daniel peut facturer 139 $ pour une boîte de croissants et de viande de saucisse. Pour lui, la différence entre sa vie et le risque de suicide plus élevé habituel des agriculteurs américains tient à sa femme glamour qui sait surfer sur internet avec perfection. Qui sait à quoi ressemble leur relation derrière des portes closes ; mais en termes d’argent et de pouvoir, je n’ai aucun mal à croire à la caractérisation par Hannah Neeleman d’eux comme étant des ‘co-PDG’ de Ballerina Farm.
Vu sous cet angle, en tant qu’entreprise familiale mêlant haute et basse technologie, Ballerina Farm n’est pas une propagande pour le modèle de ‘pionnier’ ou son successeur suburbain, la ménagère bourgeoise. Ce que les Neelemans ont construit se rapproche davantage d’une mise à jour du 21e siècle d’un modèle domestique bien plus ancien : le ‘foyer productif‘ préindustriel. C’est-à-dire un foyer qui est aussi un lieu de travail, dans lequel tout le monde est économiquement actif. Même le grand nombre de personnel à temps plein des Neelemans rappelle l’emploi historique étendu de domestiques dans les foyers productifs.
Et peut-être cela nous donne-t-il un indice sur ce qui motive vraiment le discours autour de Ballerina Farm : l’envie. Car un ‘foyer productif’ du 21e siècle de ce genre n’est pas accessible à tous. Plus que jamais, internet a permis aux mères d’avoir un peu de tout : la vie gratifiante et économiquement active, la grande famille, la belle maison, le tout tissé avec les possibilités de télétravail ouvertes par internet. Mais pas toutes les femmes. Juste celles qui ont les compétences, l’argent, le charisme, l’espace pour un bureau à domicile – et un conjoint qui partage la vision.
Si c’est votre cas, vous pouvez profiter de votre carrière flexible et gratifiante depuis chez vous, en gardant un œil sur les enfants, l’aide à domicile et le levain qui lève. Pour tous les autres, c’est le même jonglage qu’auparavant – tout en faisant défiler les clips Ballerina Farm sur votre téléphone quand vous allez au travail.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThese are lefties prtending to be Republicans at these ersatz town halls.
I am a registered Democrat, and I support Doge 98%. I have been screwed by the unaccountable bureaucracy for my entire life – just like the Trump voters have. You knew the haters were gonna hate, right? A third of you knew it and were twitching to echo the poorly informed “backlash” BS.
It’s been a MONTH, b*tches! Wait until something real happens before you crap your guts out.
Mr. Bauer, do you really believe what you just wrote? In every poll, and I don’t care for polls, there is over 60 % support for auditing and restructuring the Feds. I can only assume that you are aware of this support so I have determined that you are nothing but a hack shill. No real discussion, just the “talking points” of the folks who have been eating at the trough for far too long.
Discussions of economic politics still make the assumption that the voters are like isolated self-interest robots, only concerned with their own finances.
But other issues pertain. Just in the first month so many people have been fired or threatened with firing, in NGO jobs as well as Federal jobs, that many voters see their friends and neighbors suffering. And now the talk in the news has turned to programs that hundreds of thousands of people depend on.
If the richest man in the world told me I didn’t need food stamps or public schools for my kids I would certainly be angry. Mr. Trump would do well to brush back DOGE before he makes too many new enemies. He still needs those voters to get him through the all-important mid-term elections.
The indiscriminate firings touch everyone in the US. It’s particularly annoying that the firings have concentrated on probationary workers, who are young persons mostly. Many parents are very concerned about their fledglings and independence. So, now that they have a decent job, that f*****g asshole Musk comes along and fires them WITHOUT CAUSE. Many of them already have had good or excellent reviews. It’s just a bitter pill, and is destroying Trump’s support.
Most of this jobs in NGOs are bullshit jobs for useless woke parasites.
Now they can go and find jobs in real economy.
But no one want wasters with degrees in gender studies.
Idea that this people would ever vote for Trump in for the birds.
It is the same in uk. Previous “Conservative”, ha, ha, government should had fired hundreds of thousands of uncivil service and NHS parasites but it never did.
The town halls are more than political theater- they’re pure astroturf.
See recent polls- from a left-leaning pollster.
It was quite a feat to write this article but not mention the Harvard Harris poll from Monday that showed a 76% approval for DOGE among the public. In fact almost all of Trump’s flagship policies (deportations and wall, men in wome’s sport, ending race-based hiring practices, ending drilling bans, cutting foreign aid, tariffs) had majority support.
Indeed.
Modern Washington DC has almost never been forced to weather an economic downturn (such as a recession) and in the rare cases that it has, it bounces back faster than other areas. Because the government always finds a way to not only fund itself but also to grow – even if this means accruing $36 trillion in debt and an additional $2 trillion in accumulating yearly loans that our children’s children will have to pay back.
Individual stories of government layoffs may be sad, but this doesn’t mean that the layoffs aren’t necessary. The alternative is so much worse.
The American people understand this, and they overwhelmingly support this once-in-many-lifetimes chance to start getting America’s financial books in order.
In many regards it is far too early to conclude Trump already in serious trouble, but the chainsaw was always going to hit some of his constituency. And he won no landslide. Doesn’t take much to peel away sufficient to lose the House entirely in 20mths. Having a Billionaire in the White House and the World’s richest man cutting programmes whilst his companies acquire further Federal contracts (see Starlink and the FAA) an increasing gift to opponents. Yes absolutely an elite controls power – a real Estate & Tech Bro Billionaire elite. A great Betrayal. You can it in lights already.
And this is before the real fight in the House for his Reconciliation Bill. Here his prioritisation of tax cuts for the v rich will receive further spotlight juxtaposed with an increase in national debt and cuts to programmes that just may support many in need.
The WWF smack-down distraction twaddle will only get you so far.
I actually got a tax cut in 2017 too. Helped a ton. You may want to modify your “tax cuts for the rich theory” when many working class people significantly benefit.
He promised alot of tax cuts in his 2024 campaign. Remember the one on tips? Now watch carefully which one’s he prioritises in his Reconciliation Bill. You can be sure that relating to the top 0.1% will be prioritised. As the US treasury published itself a continuation of that gives the top percent £360k a year benefit. The ‘little guy’ gonna get screwed and you know it.
I care about my family. Is my disposable income going to increase or decrease?
Depends where you are on the strata TB, how secure your employment, type of industry you work in, your age, your asset owning situ, and your health status. Things could already be loaded in your favour. But for many things are not loaded in their favour.
And as you know if inflation ahead of wage growth…
Inflation always hits the poorest more. Who’s paying the cost of tariffs?
I sense though you may put much stock in your personal position in coming to judgment. Of course many will do that. But society relies on us also appreciating better what it like for many others less fortunate.
The problem with what DOGE is doing is that increasing efficiency seems to be a benefit but it usually is not. Taking out the slack in a complex system usually doesn’t make it work better, it makes it work worse.
Take the food distribution system. People can see that there’s a lot of wasted food and they think that’s a problem that’s easy to solve. But it’s not. It’s really, really hard not to waste food. Try too hard, and some people will starve.
My sense is that about 20% slack in a complex system is about right. So that’s about 80% efficiency. Beyond that, you probably make the system more brittle and fragile and that offsets any sayings from efficiency.
Take Elon Musk’s Twitter as an example. Elon Musk went in and cut 75% of his staff yet the company still operates about the same as it did. A success, right? Sure, unless you look at the value of the company now compared to when he bought it. On that metric it’s about as big a failure as it could be.
But company was never worth what Musk paid for it.
He knew it and tried to back out of a deal but sale deal was so tight that he could not.
So congrats to lawyers on the sale side.
His decision to fire woke parasites from Twitter was a right one.
Obviously you are in denial about censorship on Twitter under old management.
Just follow Twitter Files to find out.
Nope. You need to a better job of following the money Fred. The noise at the townhalls is from Soros backed, USAID funded (previously) progressive activists. Plenty of real journalist sources for that.
No doubt you can supply some of these real journalist sources for this insane claim?
(This is where he says he isn’t going to do my homework for me and then scuttles away with his tail between his legs – just watch!)
Let me help. Check out this and the references in it…
https://freebeacon.com/media/mainstream-media-outlets-cited-red-district-doge-protests-as-proof-of-broad-musk-backlash-soros-funded-liberal-groups-organized-them/
…well at least its my own tail down there and not some woke ideolog’s tongue as with your carcass Chamsoc. Check out the Washington Beacon for relevant video content,
And guess who were the major financial supports of the right-wing tea party protest during the Obama era: the billionaire Koch Brothers and their org “Americans for Prosperity” So it seems both sides have their billionaire supporters. And each side tries to use that fact to invalidate the actions / arguments of their opponents, claiming that the protesters were bought and paid for. Is it really hard that hard to believe that people have genuine anger that wasn’t paid for by a billionaire. One of my brothers hated Obama but he ever received any $ from Koch while my sister despises Trump and Musk. She hasn’t received a dime from Soros. But go ahead hate on people who are probably more like you than you imagine.
There’s no hate at this end Nick. But as others are pointing out, the only mode Progessives are actually capable of operating in is political Kabuki theatre. In their safe spaces within the bureaucracy/academy/media complex they have been incompetent self dealing, failures. And now Trump is stripping off their masks, and ripping up their fantasy scripts. Everybody will be better off as a result, including the newly maskless, who must now embrace the actual human condition that life is not a movie read-through.
Another headline question were the answer is no.
Sometimes its not even worth mocking you people…
I know how you feel
I was on about CS
Haha yes, they do that a lot, especially with the DOGE topic.
Dont believe the fear porn, Europe. Nice try, trying to convince the average citizen there’s a downside to cutting the bloat. That we should feel sympathetic and that there will be some horrible backlash to cutting the corruption and the thousands of empty desks and money going to NGOs. What a joke. It’s all the same playbook, attack Trump, attack Musk, leverage the lefties, as they cling to the lies and TDS. And don’t forget how much was exposed, which shows the global/leftist/democrat funded media and all the baddies, have a big stake and billions of dollars in manipulating you to believe you want this big, fat, corrupt leftist self destruction. I have been loving unherd, but interesting not one article with specifics about what’s actually exposed. They think you are so stupid.
Here’s the website, if you care to look and not put your faith in the media at all. Sadly, that seems to include unherd. I think we all know how the baddies behave when we are over the target. Fear, smears and gaslighting.
https://www.doge.gov/
Is this the website that claimed an $8BN savings when it was actually $8M?
Yeah, these guys are right on top of things! Honestly, even I am sometimes surprised at how gullible you hicks are!
You’d be one of the lefties they leverage. Well played.
“town halls are political theatre, and progressive activists have recognised in them an opportunity to hold Republicans’ feet to the fire.”
This one sentence sums up the entire story. Nobody knows how to work the public meeting space like progressive activists.
The DOGE fanatics remind me of the climate fanatics. Both have reasonable goals — to eliminate the federal deficit in one case and to eliminate carbon emissions in the other.
In both cases those goals are aspirational but unachievable, at least in the near term. There’s no way to cut trillions of dollars from the federal budget. There’s no way to get to net zero.
When people pursue fanatical and fantastical goals they tend to do their cause more harm than good. They often generate a backlash that stops all progress when if they had been less doctrinaire and ideological they could have achieved much of what they sought. So they get 20% of what they want instead of 80%.
What’s the answer? Give up a little to the other side. Recognize they are not evil and let them save face instead of forcing them to eat dirt. Be reasonable instead of forceful. Push but don’t shove.
Replied to your deleted post first…
Have you ever looked at political contributions from different agencies, say USAID?
Does a 97% donation rate imply neutrality to you? I’m not sure how any organization could get that partisan let alone a supposedly neutral agency.
Should I as a Republican voter just assume Correlation is not Causation. Would Democrat voters assume there was no partisan bias if donations were 97% Republican?
Every honest person knows the answer. Standard operating procedure for the Left is to push as far as they can when in power then urge the Right to be cautious when we’ve got the reins.
Right on, Mr. Bone.
97% donation rate? What are you babbling about now?!?!?
Its hard to make any sense of your “thoughts” here but are you suggesting that 97% of USAID donations went to democrats? Because that is stupid even for you!
According to Open Secrets it was 96.74% to Democrats and 3.26% to Republicans. Go ahead and check yourself. I’ll be eagerly awaiting your apology.
Do you know what USDAID is? Had you ever heard of it before Trump decided that he didn’t like it? Have you done even the most basic research about it since then?
Obviously the answer to all of these questions is a resounding NO!
Your comments make me thankful ..that at least the U.S. taxpayer dollars used to deceive the useful idiots, hasn’t gone to waste. Money well spent.
I sure do CS. Let me know if you want to have a substantive discussion.
OK. Point me to a reliable source that says that 96.74% of USAID donations went to Democrats. A link to the actual story because I looked at Open Secrets and it said nothing of the kind.
If you go to the USAID page on Open Secrets and click on Totals it has a chart of the Democrat to Republican contributions and percentages by election year dating back to 1990.
In 2006 contributions were 52% Republican. In 2008 it went to 69% Democrat. 2010 was 89% Democrat and from 2012-2024 its all over 90% Democrat.
You can’t handle the truth: They ARE evil.
That is the recipe more for the same old same old.
.
Have you ever looked at political contributions from different agencies, say USAID?
Does a 97% donation rate imply neutrality to you? I’m not sure how any organization could get that partisan let alone a supposedly neutral agency.
Should I as a Republican voter just assume Correlation is not Causation. Would Democrat voters assume there was no partisan bias if donations were 97% Republican?
It would be interesting to know where you’re coming from, Carlos. It’s not that nothing you say has any value. It’s just that you don’t seem to have come to terms with the mood of our side of the spectrum.
Nobody voted for Trump expecting nuance. Our exasperation over decades of the political class not stewarding the country well reached a head. We tried the diplomatic approach to no avail, so we sent a bouncer.
In other words, read the room. There’s no strategy other than full sunlight.
You’re conflating a lot, Fred. Do some more research.
Red-District DOGE Protests, Cited As Proof of Broad Musk ‘Backlash,’ Were Organized By Left-Wing Groups
Yes, exactly. It’s all orchestrated and Doge is showing the receipts
Free Beacon? LOL!
Again, you people are beyond mockery! But that won’t stop me doing it anyway!
You may be the person held in lowest esteem here, but you seem too obtuse to realize it.
Given all the time evidently on your hands, no one will be surprised.
What did they expect? Trump inherited a booming economy from Obama, drove it into the ground through his lavish tax cuts for the richest Americans and his grotesque incompetence during the first year of Covid.
Biden may have received little credit for it but his administration did the hard work of turning the economy around and the pain that involved.
I suspect that many US voters are starting to realize that they may have elected an imbecile and the person actually running the government is a racist megalomaniac.
Kamala Harris must be looking pretty good to them right about now – shame that its too late for that…
Polls show the Trumpster is off to a phenomenal start. Still, he hasn’t moved to reduce income taxes yet.
Once he slashes income taxes and replaces it with the hearty 90% trust fund tax, we will be swimming in revenue.
I’m not sure that you know what the word phenomenal means.
Anyway, the true MAGA lunatics like you don’t care about facts and will blindly follow your dumbo cult leader regardless of what nonsense he spouts. Its the few in the middle that matter and when they see inflation going up, chaos in the government, services being cut willy nilly and maniacs like Dan Bongino being appointed to senior roles we’ll soon see Trump’s already squishy approval numbers tank.
Reality will eventually strike the Trump fantasy world, the shitshow is only starting, a huge market crash is coming with a slowing economy and fiscal crisis. Income tax cuts with a 2 trillion annual deficit? Good luck with that. And don’t tell me they will slash government spending and social security and Medicare amd defense spending to give more to the rich, which will cause a depression. Trump will sink like a rock. The great swindle will be exposed soon.
In the next 4 years we will have learned what NPD abuse and the shared fantasy is on a global scale.
Let’s remove the schoolground politic of Dem/Rep
This is about psychopathology and the shared fantasy – In this instance we have two unchecked, phenomenally rich/powerful guys who fit the bill of malignant NPD running the country with the safety off.
Unlike other leaders falling into the NPD bracket (Blair, Clintons, Obama, Reagan) but these two are genuinely sadistic. They don’t care about anyone, or anything, they dont even care about MAGA. The whole world is an object to play with and reality is something to be played with.
Right now they are trying to find a way to solve the crisis in the debt system where the US stopped QE and collapsed the bond market. Which is why we are seeing the state being torn up, which is why we are seeing deals in Ukraine, which is why we are seeing a pullback in global military committment.
Basel regs meant all banks had to hold a certain amount of long duration debt and They have been running false pricing on overnight swaps for 2 years now, and that only leads for every other broke bank to increase risk because like SVB, they know the gov (or Jamie Dimon as a proxy for the gov) will bail them out. (Wait? Who’s freeloading on gov time now?)
All of this is another fantasy. The US cannot keep expanding if it tariffs the rest of the world without forcing new alliances amongst nations which redeuce their dependency on the US. It cannot cut all wealfare support without creating a revolutionary reaction internally. The USA cannot project power if it pulls troops away – which then takes away the ability for the US to use it’s most powerful weapon – The Dollar. GDP Q/Q comes out tomorrow and I have bet that it spells stagflation.
Meanwhile, it cannot rebuild the gap in the demographics required to restructure taxation (especially at the lower rates they aim for) without immigration. You can’t have kids in the past.. We missed that boat 15 years ago.
Oh and back to psychopathology – not only do narcs self destruct blaming the country/family/relationship for not living up to their impossible fantasy. But they turn on each other. Elon and Trump wont be able to be in the same room at the same time after a while… MAGA will tear itself apart.
None of this feels good. Apart from feeling gobally unsafe, it actually ends up with the end of the USA as we know it. Some of you may be indifferent, but we are going to see a lot of people dying. On a global scale. Trump just opened up a multipolar world when all his voters were voting for a Unipolar one.
Some of this is true. The mistake is not recognizing that the world already broke away from Unipolarity with BRICS. Thats 55% of the world’s population.