hector126

I believe a big part of this phenomenon is the rise in public awareness of the efficacy of ADHD stimulants, specifically Adderall, Vyvanse, Ritalin, etc.

Eventually the genie left the bottle and people realized these medications make most (not all) people feel very good. Scott's written about this before, but they basically bump up your personal "productivity" metric. This effect is observed for those who suffer ADHD symptoms and those who don't.

Basically, these meds can allow a clinically unmotivated and lethargic person to clean their room and buy groceries and call the bank.

They can also allow a 'normal' person to work for 12h without a break then come home and continue writing their novel.

There are now online ADHD "clinics" which let you take an online assessment (!) before a 30min meeting with a doctor who'll then prescribe you amphetamines. If you're someone who knows to say, the process has been incredibly streamlined.

Would love an answer for this as well.

There have been many books written on the subject, as in my previous comment, I suggested The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy.

It's not antisemitic or even remotely conspiratorial to acknowledge that Israel and Israeli-Americans have been very successful in exerting influence on the federal government. I think it's bad-faith well-poisoning for you to bring up nonsense like the Protocols.

That's very likely the case, though I don't think either of us have the details to make that assertion confidently. My comment was only in regards to lobby groups which operate freely on US soil staffed mostly by Americans.

Were there an analogous "ARPAC" which lobbied for Russian interests I imagine it would be under an immense amount of scrutiny.

Correct. My understanding is that there's no individual lobby group in America with more influence on foreign policy than AIPAC.

The book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy is a great read which fairly and methodically outlines how this influence works and what effects it's had on American policy, spanning decades.

> Mohta wrote, “My family also runs several manufacturing plants in various industries, which has given me unrestricted access to assembly lines since I was 15.”

Color me not remotely surprised.

Can you imagine yourself or your women friends buying one if it was affordable?

If you're being honest about your position that 2028 won't be a fair election, I'm effectively offering you free money, right? There are loads of bet/escrow systems out there - I'd be happy to do all the facilitation myself.

They literally said "provably true".

Trump absolutely lies a lot. He doesn't lie _all the time_. I don't think that's an inappropriate level of nuance for someone to acknowledge.

I would argue that this is not the end of your country's democracy and that in 2028 a new president will be elected.

You'll have a new president in 2028, be it Vance, Shapiro, or Oprah Winfrey. Either way, it won't be DJT.

I do remember, obviously. Those kind of tired jabs are better suited for /r/politics, I'm sure you'll be right at home there :)

That said, I also remember when Trump said he'd build a wall and that Mexico would pay for it. A remarkable amount of what Trump says isn't true, I think everyone's in agreement on that.

If the country is happy with the state of affairs in 2028 then I expect you'll have JD Vance as your president. If not, maybe Newsom, Buttigieg (my hope), or Shapiro. Either way, if you truly think that 2024 was the last election Americans will vote in, respectfully, I think you're a little bit deluded.

> Of the DOGE list's initial claim of $16 billion in savings, half came from an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) listing that was entered into the Federal Procurement Data System (FPDS) in 2022 with a whopping $8 billion maximum possible value.

> According to a DOGE post on X, that number was a typo that was corrected in the contract database to $8 million on Jan. 22 of this year before being terminated a week later, and DOGE "has always used the correct $8M in its calculations."

Jeez, that's pretty damning.

I would argue that this is not the end of your country's democracy and that in 2028 a new president will be elected.

You'd disagree, I trust?

The first sentence begins with "Trump lies through his teeth with every word"

Love him or hate him, I would argue that there are indeed words Trump has spoken which are not lies made through his teeth. I would put that level of hyperbole within the realm of "dubious basis in truth".