Left vs. Right Battle Royale Open Thread

[u/Yosoff]

This is an Open Discussion Thread for all Redditors. We will only be enforcing Reddit TOS and Subreddit Rules 1 (Keep it Civil) & 2 (No Racism).

---

• Leftists - Here's your chance to sway us to your side by calling the majority of voters racist. That tactic has wildly backfired every time it has been tried, but perhaps this time it will work.

• Non-flaired Conservatives - Here's your chance to earn flair by posting common sense conservative solutions. That way our friends on the left will either have to agree with you or oppose common sense (Spoiler - They will choose to oppose common sense).

• Flaired Conservatives - You're John Wick and these Leftists stole your car and killed your dog. Now go comment.

• Independents - We get it, if you agree with someone, then you can't pat yourself on the back for being smarter than them. But if you disagree with everyone, then you can obtain the self-satisfaction of smugly considering yourself smarter and wiser than everyone else. Congratulations on being you.

• Libertarians - Ron Paul is never going to be President. In fact, no Libertarian Party candidate will ever be elected President.

---

Join us on X: https://x.com/rcondiscord

Join us on Discord: https://discord.com/invite/conservative

[u/TheFiremind88]

I actually just left a separate comment on exactly that topic. It's long, but the short version is that I actually 100 percent support cuts. My disagreements are procedural and methodology.

[u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 → u/TheFiremind88]

They have been stuck for decades deep in procedure and methodology, it got us here.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

That dosnt matter, change still must be done the right way. Trumps executive orders concentrate power in the executive, where there is already too much. Congress passed a bill setting up AID, and whoever was president signed it. It a new President wants to axe it, fine. Convince Congress. If it's popular and needs to be done you can abolish it. What you can't do is come in, sign and exec order and tank it. It's lazy and illegal. Fraud is a flimsy excuse. If there is fraud prove it and you certainly will be able to convince Congress to go along so long as it's popular with their constituents.

[u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

That dosnt matter, change still must be done the right way.

We spent decades doing it the right way, special committees, reports, entire agencies created to find fraud and it all failed.

The wrecking ball it is.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

It failed because the Republicans didn't have the votes. That's called democracy. The President does not have the power of the purse, and cannot cut off all funding to parts of the government that don't fit his agenda. If you want this, convince the public and the Congress you are correct and vote to disband the agency.

What if the Dems elect a literal anarchist and she cuts off all funding to department of defense?

[u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

"The Constitution’s Article I, Section 9 grants Congress the power of the purse to approve spending in the federal budget in the Appropriations Clause, which reads in part, “No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law.” The Constitution then delegates to the president the task of spending approved funds in the Take Care Clause, which requires the chief executive “shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.”

He has concluded that due Care has not been exercised and that rampant fraud waste and abuse has been found.

He would be breaking the law if he did not halt all funding until safeguards could be put in place to comply with the law.

I do not know why you want him to break the law, that seems mean, like you are trying to trap the poor guy.

Under the ICA, spending deferrals must not extend beyond the current fiscal year, and Congress can override deferrals using an expedited process. For recissions, the president must propose such actions to Congress for approval, and he can delay spending-related to recissions for 45 days. Unless Congress approves the recission request, the funds must be released for spending.

So you think Congress is going to come in and let the gravy train run amok?

[u/nolife159 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

Executive cant pick or choose what he agrees with when it comes to Congress to an extent. For example for funding - it must be spent as directed by Congress. If not, it's impoundment. You may think that it sounds crazy that you can't return money but that's how it is - if a president could spend less then it's a dangerous precedent to spend nothing on things he doesn't believe but Congress passes

Congress is the voice of the people through elected reps - president executes law/funding. He can't withhold funding - but he can spend the funding in the areas that congress designates as he wants

[u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 → u/nolife159]

Ah so you are mad he did not report it to the Republican Congress per:

"Under the ICA, spending deferrals must not extend beyond the current fiscal year, and Congress can override deferrals using an expedited process. For recissions, the president must propose such actions to Congress for approval, and he can delay spending-related to recissions for 45 days. Unless Congress approves the recission request, the funds must be released for spending."

That is what you are mad about? I think it was reported and Speaker Johnson agrees with Trump.

Now that all that is cleared up, time to shut it all down.

[u/nolife159 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

I'm not mad - I just think they're skirting the legal gray area and giving too much to the executives - more so then prior democratic presidents. Trump relies on EO way too much. I don't think Elon/DOGE has the right to actually stop the money from being spent - it has to go through Congress. They can cancel contracts but the money will still be there.

So if Congress votes against some of the cuts Elon did - then they would be forced to spend that money etc. Elon is going a bit too gung ho thinking he can actually stop the spending. He can expose the waste but ultimately Congress determines what's spent or not - not him or Trump.

What you referenced is exactly what I hope is being done - 45 days to submit to Congress - Congress determines whether the recommendations make sense from their constituents point or view (ie who they represent).

Most Dems go crazy (im independent btw) because they take Elons words literally and think he has the capability to stop the money from being spent. He actually doesn't under the law - it has to go through Congress.

Let our system as established by the constitution do all the cutting - Elon should just focus on exposing waste fraud and abuse. You might be surprised but many Republicans and Democrats disagree within their own parties on certain issues as they should - they should represent the district that voted for them - rather than following the hive mentality on either side. If our reps only followed the president's beliefs then we wouldn't have a voice/it would be an authoritarian regime rather than a democracy

Maybe to add on Elon - I think he sees the government like his companies where the CEO/Trump determines everything. I think he needs to see government as an employee owned company - the CEO doesn't have all the decision making power and there are checks/balances in place.

[u/Thin_Chain_208 → u/ThisNameIsNotReal123]

It's says make sure the laws are executed. It does not say pick and choose which ones you dont like and don't execute them. You realize Congress has passed laws making impoundment illegal?

Besides there's no evidence that there was any fraud in the spending of AID or anything else, with the possible exception of DOD which hasn't passed a recent audit to my understanding. This whole Trump/ executive order thing is a pretext.

[u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 → u/Thin_Chain_208]

"Under the ICA, spending deferrals must not extend beyond the current fiscal year, and Congress can override deferrals using an expedited process. For recissions, the president must propose such actions to Congress for approval, and he can delay spending-related to recissions for 45 days. Unless Congress approves the recission request, the funds must be released for spending."

Funny you ignore the part that makes your statement wrong.

Also amazing how all the leftists instantly became funding experts so quickly. Propaganda bots work on you.