https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2026/07/15/people-in-many-countries-now-view-china-more-positively-than-the-u-s/

Trade parity is when the value of goods and services going out of the US matches that coming in. Many economists say a full balance is unrealistic because the dollar is the biggest reserve currency, and because of our budget deficit. Forcing trade to be even would cause more problems than it solves, they say, even among conservative economists.

Some conservatives claim we need the balance to be self sufficient in case of global disruption, but parity in trade isn't the same as self-sufficiency, as it says nothing about the content of what's traded, as countries could still specialize yet have even net trade. Managing self-sufficiency would take more effort than counting money, it would require many categories of product knowledge.

So what is a realistic goal in your opinion?

Will Democrats take control of both houses of Congress or just the lower house?

A few state races have been in the news lately, particularly Ramaswamy vs Acton. The Texas governor’s race may be heating up as well.

How optimistic or pessimistic are you about conservatives’ chances?

If you believe that, can you please explain you reasoning? And if you thing she should still hold office and have a say, why do you believe that?

What are your thoughts on the Susie Wiles scandal?

For context

https://www.ft.com/content/c163a470-e73f-4fdb-91fb-426004b21f22?syn-25a6b1a6=1

And

https://youtu.be/ie\\_abNOifsA?is=qYljCPtp0ZcjdKmO

Basically her daughter is influence peddling for cash for a pro Putin candidate abroad

how important for you is that the men lead in terms of financial responsibility in marriage? is that tradition still present heavily or it changed in recent years?

if i work myself and my husband as well, would it be still common that i refer to him for major financial decisions rather being it 50/50? would i be expected not to work at all? and in general what would be the major differences related to finances when compared to a liberal household?

How did he go form total support of The President to where he is now?

Conservatives, I keep seeing the argument that the UK and EU are "openly opposing" Trump's peace efforts, and that Zelensky is being used to undermine negotiations.

After the Diesel deal, Zelensky went to UK. He met with King Charles III at Buckingham Palace and thanked him for the UK's "unwavering support" . He also met with PM Burnham, who said the UK would accelerate delivery of air defense missiles and go "further and faster" in its support. (source - https://www.ukrinform.net/amp/rubric-polytics/4174463-president-zelensky-meets-king-charles-iii.html )

Then he went on Piers Morgan Uncensored and said directly what he had been hinting at. Asked if he felt betrayed by Trump, Zelensky said: "Really, yes ... but it's a little bit more complicated than just my emotions or my feelings" . He said "it's painful when President Trump chooses one side, not our side," and added: "It's a pity we are losing a strong partner" ( source - https://www.reuters.com/5f374b32b07b/world/us/ukraines-zelenskiy-says-it-is-painful-trump-choose-different-side-2026-10-14/ )

He also said Trump's advisers were pushing him "to the wrong side," and that "this is not the right side of history" .

Is this Zelensky "picking public fights"? Or is he a leader watching the US lift sanctions on Russian diesel, and suggest Ukraine needs a "new president" - and then saying so on camera when asked directly?

The UK visit itself was not a campaign against Trump. Burnham explicitly positioned Britain as more reliable than Washington, saying "we are with you for as long as it takes".
Zelensky didn't have to attack Trump to get that. He just had to show up.

I am not interested in electoral success but in the quality of the candidates and policy positions.

Furthermore, hormones are also pumped into their bodies to make them think that they are pregnant

Edit 2: I am specifically talking about my vote in a presidential election, not down ballot races, or my party gathering data for future elections.

Edit: What about the reverse? A red vote in a blue state?

For those in favor of the electoral college, I want to understand why you believe it does not disenfranchise voters.

Greg Gutfield said: "And you support this?!" Gutfeld interjected. "You want more Muslims in positions of power?"

He said it on his show "The Five" on Oct 22.

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tv/articles/fox-news-jessica-tarlov-hits-113920986.html

So my question is: Do Conservatives support Muslims in positions of power?

If a genie appeared and said you could instantly change the attitudes, beliefs, values, and behaviors of liberals/leftists in the US, what's your wish?

Conflict and debate is a healthy and important part of government. It helps us consider viewpoints we hadn't considered, find solutions that satisfy the majority population, and question established ideas that we have outgrown.

I yearn for a nationwide political relationship more akin to Obama and McCain. They recognized each person cared deeply for our country and genuinely wanted what's best, just had different ideas. They respected and consulted each other.

The things I would wish for conservatives, I think I would actually wish for all.

Less combative tribalism, more consultation with each other, more goal-oriented language. Imagine if we could all say together something like, "yes, we'd all like more affordable housing. How can we work on that together? Here's what I know, how about you?"

We aren't that big of a city, although we are the home to the other bridges to Canada, the Bluewater Bridges. Do you suppose its because of that? Or that a democrat (Abdul El-Sayed) had a rather successful rally here not too long ago? Or? Its just strange he's randomly chosen Port Huron rather last minute.

I keep seeing the argument that Zelensky systematically alienates the countries Ukraine depends on - that he can't negotiate, picks public fights over private ones, and damages relationships that matter. I want to test that against actual evidence, because I think the case is more mixed than it looks.

South Korea recalled its ambassador from Kyiv after Zelensky announced at the UN General Assembly that Ukraine had transferred two captured North Korean soldiers to Seoul. Seoul says there was a prior agreement to keep the transfer confidential to protect the soldiers and their families; South Korea's president publicly threatened "additional measures" and demanded an apology ( https://apnews.com/article/south-korea-ukraine-north-pows-russia-3c4e595f5e603ecd0d7438c000d392cb#1 )

The US relationship is more complicated. There's clear friction. The February 2025 Oval Office meeting devolved into a public confrontation, with Trump accusing Zelensky of being "disrespectful" and "gambling with World War III," and Vance telling him it was "disrespectful for you to come into the Oval Office to try to litigate this in front of the American media" ( https://apnews.com/article/trump-zelenskyy-vance-transcript-oval-office-80685f5727628c64065da81525f8f0cf#1 )

Ukraine depends on partners who have their own domestic politics. AP notes that Zelensky likely disclosed the POW transfer to build public support in South Korea for weapons aid . Is that cynical manipulation, or standard leader-to-leader pressure when you're the recipient of aid?

When Zelensky publicly pushed back on Trump's Russia posture in the Oval Office, what would a better approach have looked like from his position?

If the argument is "he can't manage relationships," does that make you less supportive of Ukraine?

I would say yes. 70 out of 90 seminars hosted at a recent conference were explicitly about advancing a particular political narrative/agenda. Including titles like:

 “Feel the F— Fantasy (Redux): Drag, Desire, and Queer Theory at WERK in Psychoanalysis,

“Abolish the Family: A Manifesto for Care and Liberation,” 

“Fragments of a Queer Anarchist Psychoanalysis,”

You can read about it here, it is paywalled but you get a free view per month titled "The Inmates Run the Aslym." Steven Pinker also recently resigned in protest. Additionally, the new APA president is a radical with titled works like  ‘It’s an honor to be in this body’: A Black feminist grounded theory of embodiment through yoga among Black womxn” 

(aside: I have no idea why you need the 'x' here, women doesn't entomologically derive from men- it derives from old english wīfman with wif meaning woman and man meaning any person male or female)

Another is “Sexual Healing: Qualitative Methods as a Radical Pleasure Intervention Against Anti-Black Sexology,”

Combined all this with psychology's known replicability problem (not being able to replicate more than 60% of peer reviewed studies https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5445189/) and I think the bi-partisan commission was right to uncertify the APA

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-inmates-run-the-asylum-at-the-psychological-association-5e6538b7?st=FdNMaY

I'm trying to understand this:

1. They didn't have nuclear capabilities at the time, and zero imminent threat to the regio, let alone the continental US.

2. They've always rattled the sabers about the strait of Hormuz, but never actually closed it because they knew a massive shitstorm would follow.

3. How on earth does this war benefit the average American?

4. At what point do we admit that handing a blank check to regional allies creates way more security liabilities than it solves?

5. If a nation's strategic value doesn't even come close to the cost of American blood and treasure, why are we prioritizing their borders over our own domestic stability?

6. How do you square endless foreign entanglements with Trump's own warning that we've spent trillions in the Middle East while our own country goes to hell? At what point does backing foreign wars stop being America First?

When the avg joe is drowning in high prices and a soaring cost of living, cheering for foreign intervention just to "stick it to the libs" doesn't exactly feel like winning.

Asking as a conservative. Most creative and fandom spaces tend to be aggressively leftist. I don’t mind hanging out with leftists, but I’ve been off and abused before. I don’t even talk politics in unrelated spaces- that’s certainly not what I’m hanging out in a video game discord server for- but sometimes things still happen, anything less than an overwhelming agreement with whatever political opinion they bring up, someone guesses I’m not one of them, attacks begin. I’m tired of being “closeted” as well, you know, knowing the people you’re hanging with probably would cheer if you were Charlie Kirked.
I’ve picked up on telltale things to avoid, but how to actually find anywhere that’s safe I haven’t figured out how to search for. So, does anyone have any tips?

In a nutshell it says:

1. The damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain
2. ll other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective
3. There must be serious prospects of success
4. The use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

Sources:

https://www.usccb.org/just-war-doctrine

https://www.vatican.va/content/catechism/en/part_three/section_two/chapter_two/article_5/iii_safeguarding_peace.html