Dizkneelande

Household Energy prices increased 30% under Biden. Retards blame Trump.

6.1 million Americans are behind on their mortgage, highest in 20+ years. Trumps fault says the retards.

Everyone is an international trade and macroeconomic expert now

Date check “Demand throughout 2024 fluctuated but is higher overall than pre-pandemic levels. 5.9 billion meals were distributed nationally from July 1, 2023, to June 30, 2024 — a higher figure than the last couple of fiscal years but a drop-off from 2021, when 6.6 billion meals were distributed.” Far Right Fascist Axios - U.S. residents living in food-insecure households Annually; 2018-2023

We also have sanctions with those countries so trade is already tightly controlled. These people are retarded.

And nobody will go to jail

In his world it’s better for the economy if the us has annual 2 trillion dollar deficits

Nobody cares about this other than the hate boner boys

87 editors every single one of them is a registered Democrat

The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.

Overall Score The following are the overall bias and reliability scores for MeidasTouch News according to our Ad Fontes Media ratings methodology. The MeidasTouch website was created in April 2020 with the goals of “protecting American democracy, defeating Trumpism and holding Republicans accountable.” It was founded by three siblings — Ben, Brett and Jordan Meiselas — while they were in COVID-19 quarantine. The founders also publish a podcast. Reliability: 22.55 Bias: -19.05

I give fat Tim 6 months before he is publicly endorsing AOC and thinking she’ll win like Kamala and Hillary.

Grok says you’re a lying liar As of March 21, 2025, the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has not cut special education funding itself. The funding for special education, primarily through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), remains intact at the levels appropriated by Congress—around $14.2 billion for IDEA Part B Grants to States and $540 million for Part C early intervention in fiscal year 2024, based on the latest budget data. These are statutory programs, meaning they’re protected by law and can’t be slashed by the DOE alone; any reduction would require Congressional action. What has happened, though, is a significant reduction in the DOE’s workforce. On March 11, 2025, the department announced it was cutting nearly half its staff—over 1,300 positions—leaving about 2,183 employees. This move, tied to President Trump’s push to dismantle the DOE, hit offices like Federal Student Aid, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR), and the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), which oversees IDEA implementation. The DOE claims it will “continue to deliver on all statutory programs,” including special education funding, but the staff cuts have sparked concerns about how effectively it can manage and oversee these programs with a skeleton crew. The worry isn’t about immediate cuts to the dollars flowing to states—those are still moving for the 2025-26 school year, per DOE statements and NCES employees cited by NPR. Instead, it’s about the long game: fewer staff could mean delays in processing, less oversight to ensure states use the money correctly, and potential chaos if the department’s role shrinks further or gets shifted elsewhere (like to Health and Human Services, as some propose). For example, the OCR, which enforces disability rights under IDEA, lost hundreds of staff, raising fears about weaker protections against discrimination. Posts on X and analyses from groups like the Center for American Progress echo this, warning that reduced capacity might indirectly harm special ed services down the line, even if the funding itself hasn’t been touched yet. No hard data shows funding being cut as of today—Congress hasn’t passed anything to that effect, and Trump’s executive order from March 20, 2025, only directs the DOE to “facilitate closure” while keeping programs running for now. But the situation’s fluid. If Congress doesn’t act to fully fund or reauthorize IDEA at current levels in the next budget cycle—or if the DOE’s gutting leads to administrative breakdowns—special ed could feel the pinch later. For now, the money’s still there; it’s the people managing it who’ve taken the hit. What’s your take on where this might head?

I think we should keep it and throw another trillion dollars into it because it’s having such a tremendous impact

Let’s ask Grok I assume you're asking about the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) and whether student grades have improved since its establishment. The Department of Education was created in 1979 and began operations in 1980, so we’re looking at trends over the past four decades or so. There’s no direct, nationwide data specifically tracking "student grades" (like GPAs) over this exact period in a centralized way tied to the DOE’s creation. However, we can look at proxies for academic performance, such as standardized test scores, which are often used to gauge student achievement and educational outcomes. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), known as the "Nation's Report Card," provides long-term trend data on reading and math performance for students at ages 9, 13, and 17, going back to the early 1970s. This gives us a good window into trends before and after the DOE’s establishment. Here’s what the data shows: - **Pre-DOE (1970s):** Before the DOE was created, NAEP scores for 9-, 13-, and 17-year-olds in reading and math were relatively flat or showed modest gains. For example, from 1971 to 1980, reading scores for 17-year-olds hovered around 285-286 (on a 0-500 scale), while math scores for the same age group stayed around 300-304. There wasn’t a dramatic upward trend, but the system was stable. - **Post-DOE (1980s onward):** After the DOE began, scores didn’t show a clear, consistent improvement tied to its existence. For 17-year-olds, reading scores remained stagnant (e.g., 289 in 1990, 287 in 2008) and math scores barely budged (e.g., 305 in 1990, 306 in 2012). For younger students (age 9), there were some gains—reading rose from 208 in 1971 to 221 in 2008, and math from 219 to 243 over the same period—but these improvements tapered off over time. By 2022, after the pandemic, scores for 9-year-olds dropped significantly (5 points in reading, 7 in math from 2020), marking the first-ever math decline in the NAEP long-term trend data. - **Overall Trend:** From 1980 to the mid-2000s, there were some incremental gains, particularly in math and for younger students, often linked to standards-based reforms like No Child Left Behind (2001). But these gains were uneven, and since around 2012, scores have either flatlined or declined. The 2022 NAEP data showed historic drops, though that’s partly tied to COVID disruptions. So, have student grades—or at least their academic performance as measured by tests—improved since the DOE? Not in a clear, sustained way. Performance crept up slightly in some areas for a while, but it’s been stagnant or declining for the past decade-plus, with recent years showing backsliding. Critics argue the DOE hasn’t delivered on improving outcomes despite increased federal spending (from $38 billion in 2000 to $70 billion by 2019, unadjusted for inflation). Supporters might say it’s helped standardize efforts and fund equity initiatives, but the results don’t show a transformative leap forward. Grades themselves are trickier to assess directly—some districts have shifted to "standards-based grading" or relaxed policies (e.g., dropping D’s and F’s post-COVID), which can inflate grades without reflecting real learning gains. A 2023 study in Washington state found A’s spiked in 2020 and became less predictive of state test performance, suggesting grade inflation might mask underlying trends. Bottom line: No strong evidence suggests student performance has consistently improved since the DOE’s creation. It’s more of a mixed bag—some early progress, then a plateau, and lately a dip. What do you think about this, or were you looking for something more specific?

Remember when democrats lit crosses on fire in front yards to intimidate black folks? Same playbook.

My kids just came home and no longer know how to read because Trump is eliminating the DOE. This is a constitutional crisis.

I think he is saying college educated white woman's number 1 political priority is the ability to kill their unborn baby.

I’m guessing based on the photo of him I saw

According to Grok: "Which Major Legacy Media Network Do White, College-Educated Women Watch? MSNBC is the most likely major legacy media network that White, college-educated women watch. This is supported by: Pew’s finding that 62% of MSNBC’s regular viewers are women, and a significant portion (nearly two-thirds) are college graduates. The network’s strong Democratic lean (58% of viewers are Democrats), which aligns with the political leanings of White, college-educated women as shown in the X posts. MSNBC’s programming, such as "The Rachel Maddow Show," appeals to a highly educated, liberal audience, matching this demographic’s profile."

His gunt when he takes a p!ss

If we just spend another few trillion on this it will fix the problem. Maybe it’s the federal government that’s the problem

NBC News: Right Direction Rises to 44% From 27% winning

Remember when they said the Steele dossier was credible but Hunters laptop wasn’t credible? Yeah that was awesome. That’s the level of retard fat Tim is at.