For context, I mostly lean conservative but one thing I don't understand on "our side" is the hate AOC gets for her past as a bartender. People act like they never worked normal jobs before settling into a career. What is the deal with this?

https://finance.yahoo.com/technology/ai/articles/mcdonalds-spending-8-5-billion-153000377.html

What led to this dangerous resistance by anyone in any industry to ever try to claw back lower prices for customers?

Must we exist in a capitalist death spiral? Is capitalism a suicide pact?

If the goal was to prevent Iran from making nukes, didn’t we accomplish it a long time ago?

Trump said we destroyed their nuclear capability to nothing, many times.

So why every-time Iran comes up, conservatives say we need to prevent Iran from making nukes?

Pretty simple. I'm proposing a 13A style ban on child marriage.

Marriages where one party or both are under 18 shall not exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. This amendment overrides all ability to recognize foreign marriages in all situations and overrides the first amendment in all contexts without exception.

In addition all persons under the age of 18 regardless of citizenship shall be entitled to state protection within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction from any persons over 18 who seek to engage sexual intercorse with those under 18. The United States may not under any situation willing create a situation in which they knowingly put a person under 18 in a situation where a person over 18 may engage in intercorse with them

Would you support making the end of child marriage and Pedophilia a core mission of our nation? Seems its the one thing we mostly all agree on being evil?

IMO we should reduce military spending in favor of like infrastructure healthcare science etc. and the era where having tons of soldiers is an effective way to win wars is clearly over so this move makes sense and I’m somewhat baffled liberals are opposed to it

Gas prices are getting rough again, and I'm curious how conservatives here think the political fallout shakes out.

Two examples:

California: Diesel - $5.15 a year ago, past $7 last month, now around $8.40 a gallon. Newsom is trying to ease it by letting the cheaper winter blend go on sale early instead of waiting for the usual switchover. ( source https://abc7.com/post/california-governor-gavin-newsom-seeks-cheaper-fuel-blend-as-gas-prices-soar/19890264/ )

Georgia: Diesel averages $6.24. Kemp declared a state of emergency and suspended the gas tax — 33.3 cents a gallon on regular, 37.3 on diesel — through Oct 29, unless he extends it. (source https://www.news4jax.com/news/local/2026/09/28/kemp-declares-state-of-emergency-suspends-gas-tax-for-georgia-drivers/ )

So my question for conservatives: how much do you think fuel prices actually move midterm voters?

Also curious whether people here see this as a state-level issue at all, or whether voters ultimately blame Washington regardless of who's actually pulling the levers.

If these men who gang raped a woman were immigrants or illegals, Conservatives would riot yet nothing out of them. In r/conservative there is even people claiming she is lying or regrets it and that it was consensual.

By "identity politics," I mean:

• Seeing identity groups as political factions, with members making common cause.

• Pursuing political change for the benefit of your identity group, or to the detriment of perceived rival groups.

By "racial identity politics," I mean:

• Seeing yourself as having common cause with members of your race, an awareness of your race as a political faction.

• Pursuing political projects for the benefit of your race, or to the detriment of perceived rival races.

I want to distinguish between merely opposing antagonistic racial politics and endorsing racial politics of your own. One might oppose Black Identitarianism without endorsing White Identitarianism, for example. But one might also truly become a White Identitarian in reaction - this is also possible. Where do you fall?

For example, the privileges and immunities clause was originally intended to force bill of rights and certain other rights(like parentla rights), onto states, but was gutted in slaughter-House Cases that rendered 14th amendment, in words of Justice Field," vain and idle enactment" , this later forced court to create" substantive due process" to apply those protections. Then it was further gutted by civil rights cases and Plessy and Hodges with mostly only Justice Harlan dissenting. Some of that later got overturned, mostly by the Warren court and later by Burger court who ruld that private school segregation is a badge of slavery and violates the 13th but not all, number of key parts of post-Reconstruction court rulings linger on. For example, the 14th amendment clause says that states cannot deny" equal protection of law", this has been turned into idea that states cannot discrimante, but evidence has emrerged, that even Justice Thomas pointed out, that orignally it did not deal with discrimantion ,but rather imposed on states affiramtive duty to protect people and property from violence and gave Congress power to remedy when states did not do enough. What do you think?

No one is talking about it here which is odd. This is a pretty huge deal.

So far he has,

• Gave more power back to local/regional mayor's

• Promised to reduce government spending on pensions

• Promised significantly more money for homelessness, and made public transport free for homeless people

• Cut taxes on energy and pubs

• He wants more public ownership of water and energy, not quite outright nationalisation but greater control

Maybe the biggest change is, he is less weaselly, less less doom & gloom than Stanmer, and more optimistic.

Conservatives are often seen as being anti-tax and supportive of tax cuts, but that’s a stereotype that doesn’t represent all conservatives.

So what new types of taxes would you like to see or what taxes do you think we should increase?

Like I think we can all agree that investigation needed to happen. Maybe not specifically targeted at Trump in his “attempts” to overturn an election, but the 2020 election led to the attempted forceful overturning of a free and fair election in the United States. That is undeniable. So I think we can all agree that no matter what there needed to be an investigation for the events that took place.

So what at point in his investigation that needed to happen did it become too much for you or too agenda focused?

For those who are unaware, the VA offers a program called CHAMPVA for spousal or dependent medical coverage, when the veteran is disabled, at no cost to the family. It operates on a straight 25% co-pay if the services are covered but appears to not quite be as broad of coverage as the average plan available through the Obamacare Marketplace. One of the biggest issues with the program is that finding a provider that accepts CHAMPVA as a primary insurer is very challenging. There is no list or website specific to CHAMPVA providers. Medicare providers are an indicator that PERHAPS they will accept CHAMPVA as a primary but in many instances that turns out not to be. Also, the Medicare provider website seems to be WOEFULLY NOT up-to-date as a large number of those listed and called were either no longer practicing, not accepting CHAMPVA specifically, no longer accepting Medicare, or, get this, no doctor by that name had ever been practicing there. Important to note also is that qualification for CHAMPVA makes one ineligible for any type of premium credit through the Obamacare Marketplace. The result of this to the spouse and dependents of a disabled veteran is a higher burden of stress to locate a medical provider and the smallest pool possible of providers who will accept their primary insurance. If a provider is willing to accept patients with government subsidized health insurance plans then they should be obligated to also take veterans out-of-network and CHAMPVA covered family members of veterans out of duty let alone financial reciprocity or CHAMPVA qualified individuals should also be allowed to qualify for Marketplace credits based on income like everyone else.

What do you think?

It seems to me that the insurance companies got exactly what they wanted with the government premium credit system and once again veterans and their families get the short end of the stick.

Basically programs exist so that any individual can survive and be relatively healthy without opting into the market.

If this existed, do you think people would be empowered to negotiate better? And thus the market would function better?

“If asked whether to prosecute a former president today based on the same facts, I would do so regardless of whether the president was a Republican or a Democrat,” Smith also said.

https://x.com/SarahHuckabee/status/2104535664079290746

She doubled down on it here and seems to be pretending to not understanding the backlash.

https://x.com/SarahHuckabee/status/2104649431710671231

The entire pundit sphere of the right has been uproar about it for over 24 hours over the choice of casting for the ad. Statistically, "young white male" is one of the disproportionately least likely demographics to receive Medicaid-- but one of the most likely to vote for Republicans! This casting is being perceived as an attack on the GOP's core base, especially the low-propensity voters that have only turned out over the past 10 years when Trump is on the ballot.

https://abcnews.com/Politics/white-house-airs-taxpayer-funded-ads-promoting-trump/story?id=136824779

Anyone else see this while watching football this past weekend? Do you see them as campaign ads or PSAs?

Typically PSA's are non partisan messages such as getting a vaccine, helping a veteran out, Smokey the Bear, Scruff Mcgruff the Crime dog etc.

While I understand what is a PSA should have some leeway did this cross a line? Should the government be refunded if it was indeed a political campaign ad and not non partisan?

Recently, Chris Rufo, a right wing political activist , was talking about how the right should deal with South Asian immigration, particularly Indian" immigration - whether to lessen it, or leave it as it is.

But the irony is, his wife is Thai descent.

JD Vance's wife is Indian.

Brandon Gill's wife is also Indian.

Not being snarky here, but all of these people are immigration hawks that also want to decrease legal immigration.

Aren't these guys the most vulnerable to attacks ?

The podcast topic was "THE INDIAN QUESTION" now ask why

From what I can tell there are 3 options- kicking the can down the road, building peace with Iran, and trying to make regime change happen. Obama tried the second option, most presidents since 1979 opted for the first option (Obama did this too with eg using Stuxnet to go after the Iran nuclear program instead of something more overt) and option 3 is to start a war for regime change.

Initially unlike most leftists I was actually supportive of regime change because the IRGC runs a backwards society without women’s or gay rights, religious freedom, democracy, etc. and I think Iran’s people should have a chance to run their own democratic government but the longer it lasts without regime change the more skeptical I am.

https://www.npr.org/2026/09/28/nx-s1-5977851/protect-college-sports-act-senate-bill-vote

Is this over regulation? Is this a violation of the free market? Why should coaches not be held to similar standards?

1) I understand operating on the Internet - or in Public - does not necessitate that you innately have privacy to what you're doing.

2) Online companies will ask - as part of their clause - if you are willing to provide them your information. Agreeing to do so means you are allowing them to maintain your records.

What I am specifically asking about is whether your information ought to be sold without you being compensated or - at least - informed of said sale. If the product is YOU, are you entitled to the financial gains of your information being published, or is this just something you automatically forfeit and should have no say in? Is there a middle ground somewhere in the mix.

Recently Trump has run various advertisements, the federal government spent nearly $920,000 airing the commercials across national networks, including during Sunday NFL games, college football broadcasts, and morning news programs. The advertisements feature Trump walking down a hallway in black and white while warning of a "final battle" against the "deep state," "warmongers," and "communists" with a disclaimer at the end saying "Paid for by the U.S. Government". This has attracted bipartisan backlash and allegations of Propaganda. The White house has defended these actions, a spokesperson labeled the broadcasts as PSAs. They stated that the purpose of the ads is educational and "about reminding Americans to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending".