1 minute ago, MIke B Bad said:

And I imagine Soros could not have been happier at that......another bullet dodged.

The fact that Key Square Capital is up in double figures over its lifetime clearly shows that Soros would have made a lot of money had he stayed til the end.

That Soros was prepared to bet 2 billion USD of his own money further underlines the extent to which he esteemed and trusted Bessent's financial acumen.

6 hours ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Hmmm . . . mostly straight and VERY white men. Does that reasonably represent the makeup of America or Murikkka?

An enthusiastic pedophile scofflaw and felon, his arch defender (who wears mascara), the scion of a corrupt Cuban political emigre family (ever wondered why the Cubans still prefer Castro's gang over the Batista regime?) and a drunken woman abusing buffoon!

What a glimpse of the make up of "Murikka's"future!

Edited August 28Aug 28 by JAG

3 hours ago, HolmesEquivelant said:

And you deflected because you’re unable to answer any of my legitimate questions.

Appears to be a common tactic for leftists.

My days are numbered? In what way? You’ll never see another Democrat for a long time. Thank your DSA.

So do you predict a GOP clean sweep during the midterms?

BTW, do you agree with trump claiming "Mission Completed" in Iran?

1 hour ago, Cameroni said:

The fact that Key Square Capital is up in double figures over its lifetime clearly shows that Soros would have made a lot of money had he stayed til the end.

That Soros was prepared to bet 2 billion USD of his own money further underlines the extent to which he esteemed and trusted Bessent's financial acumen.

From $2 billion down to $500 million.........how was Soros going to make money on that catastrophe?

Troll post removed @HolmesEquivelant this forum is open to everyone and if you try to censor an opinion, based on your assumption of their nationality again, then expect more than the post removed. Discuss the topic, rather than this constant attempt to troll and bait other poster!

18 hours ago, Cameroni said:

He's doing an excellent job. Good a real man is in charge for once.

He was sacked as a junior officer in the National Guard for being a drunken politically interpreted buffoon.

20 minutes ago, JAG said:

He was sacked as a junior officer in the National Guard for being a drunken politically interpreted buffoon.

Which just goes to show he likes a drink. A man's man.

What's not to like?

59 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:

From $2 billion down to $500 million.........how was Soros going to make money on that catastrophe?

It's simple maths. Key Square Capital made a lifetime gain of 2.9%, averaging poor and big win years out. If you'd put 2 billion in 2015 and kept it there until 2024 Soros would have made a cool 520 million USD in profit. Not too shabby.

7 hours ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Thankfully, MAGA is a dying breed, the numbers are shrinking. Only the stubborn, self delusional sycophants remain. This is a fact. Look it up.

MAGA identification is not shrinking within the GOP—it has grown. Economist/YouGov tracking shows Republican self-identification as MAGA rising from about 38% in 2022 to around 62% by mid-2026. Overall adult identification as MAGA Republican sits near 19% recently (up from the low teens earlier). The movement consolidated the Republican Party rather than fading.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/maga-republicans-won-the-party-but-may-lose-the-future/

Trump won the 2024 popular vote and Electoral College. He took roughly 49.8% (about 77.3 million votes) to Harris’s 48.3%, with 312 electoral votes. That is not a “dying breed” result. It was his first popular-vote win and a clear national victory.

Calling it “a fact” while the data shows the opposite is classic motivated reasoning. Movements do not vanish because approval dips or media narratives wish them away. Trump’s 2024 coalition was broad enough to win the popular vote; the MAGA label captured a larger share of Republicans over time. If the commenter means “Trump’s personal approval is not sky-high and some soft support has cooled,” that is fair and observable. Equating that with existential extinction of the entire tendency is fantasy.

The “thankfully dying / only sycophants left” line is pure emotional comfort food for people who cannot accept that tens of millions of voters keep choosing the other side. Projection is strong here: the people most invested in declaring the other team extinct are often the ones coping hardest with reality. Stubborn self-delusion is not exclusive to one side of the aisle—your comment is Exhibit A.

Since Vietnam, has America really supported it's veterans for instance ?

7 minutes ago, boganJoe said:

MAGA identification is not shrinking within the GOP—it has grown. Economist/YouGov tracking shows Republican self-identification as MAGA rising from about 38% in 2022 to around 62% by mid-2026. Overall adult identification as MAGA Republican sits near 19% recently (up from the low teens earlier). The movement consolidated the Republican Party rather than fading.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/maga-republicans-won-the-party-but-may-lose-the-future/

Trump won the 2024 popular vote and Electoral College. He took roughly 49.8% (about 77.3 million votes) to Harris’s 48.3%, with 312 electoral votes. That is not a “dying breed” result. It was his first popular-vote win and a clear national victory.

Calling it “a fact” while the data shows the opposite is classic motivated reasoning. Movements do not vanish because approval dips or media narratives wish them away. Trump’s 2024 coalition was broad enough to win the popular vote; the MAGA label captured a larger share of Republicans over time. If the commenter means “Trump’s personal approval is not sky-high and some soft support has cooled,” that is fair and observable. Equating that with existential extinction of the entire tendency is fantasy.

The “thankfully dying / only sycophants left” line is pure emotional comfort food for people who cannot accept that tens of millions of voters keep choosing the other side. Projection is strong here: the people most invested in declaring the other team extinct are often the ones coping hardest with reality. Stubborn self-delusion is not exclusive to one side of the aisle—your comment is Exhibit A.

Growth is only in the Republican party. Overall MAGA numbers are dwindling. Look it up. Facts are facts, numbers don't lie like MAGA members.

2 hours ago, Cameroni said:

It's simple maths. Key Square Capital made a lifetime gain of 2.9%, averaging poor and big win years out. If you'd put 2 billion in 2015 and kept it there until 2024 Soros would have made a cool 520 million USD in profit. Not too shabby.

2.9% over five years.......555

5 hours ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Growth is only in the Republican party. Overall MAGA numbers are dwindling. Look it up. Facts are facts, numbers don't lie like MAGA members.

Not a single fact in your statement. Only your dream.

12 hours ago, JAG said:

He was sacked as a junior officer in the National Guard for being a drunken politically interpreted buffoon.

Couldn't hold his liquor then. Did he piss himself? There are reports of public urination like a mutt.

7 hours ago, HolmesEquivelant said:

Not a single fact in your statement. Only your dream.

Like I said, MAGA members lie. Look it up, MAGA numbers are dwindling overall in the US.

Facts don't lie - MAGA members lie.

30 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Like I said, MAGA members lie. Look it up, MAGA numbers are dwindling overall in the US.

Facts don't lie - MAGA members lie.

You’re delusional.

Leftists lie. MAGA numbers are not dwindling.

Look it up

Facts don’t lie. Leftists/liberals lie.

Perfect example here.

Edited August 28Aug 28 by HolmesEquivelant

2 minutes ago, HolmesEquivelant said:

Leftists lie. MAGA numbers are not dwindling.

Look it up

Facts don’t lie. Leftists/liberals lie.

Perfect example here.

I'll take AI results over your highly delusional media any day:

The question presented - Are MAGA numbers declining in US?
The response - Yes, numbers and strong support for the MAGA base are declining in the United States as the 2026 midterms approach.

Recent data shows that enthusiasm and solid backing from core supporters are shrinking.

Polling Declines

• Lower Approval: Strong approval numbers inside the base have dropped from past highs of around 78% down to 70% and lower.

• Fewer Self-Identified Supporters: Surveys from late 2025 into 2026 show self-identified MAGA supporters ticking down from 57% to 50% of the Republican-leaning pool.

• General Public Resistance: A majority of general voters (about 50%) say they are much less likely to support candidates who push the strict MAGA agenda. Reports note that the base is shrinking and isolating the party.

Give it up, you're in a dying cult. The GOOD news - there's still time to get out. There are a number of support groups available. The MAGA stain isn't a permanent tattoo, it washes off quite nicely, same as dog poo.

2 hours ago, HappyExpat57 said:

I'll take AI results over your highly delusional media any day:

The question presented - Are MAGA numbers declining in US?
The response - Yes, numbers and strong support for the MAGA base are declining in the United States as the 2026 midterms approach.

Recent data shows that enthusiasm and solid backing from core supporters are shrinking.

Polling Declines

• Lower Approval: Strong approval numbers inside the base have dropped from past highs of around 78% down to 70% and lower.

• Fewer Self-Identified Supporters: Surveys from late 2025 into 2026 show self-identified MAGA supporters ticking down from 57% to 50% of the Republican-leaning pool.

• General Public Resistance: A majority of general voters (about 50%) say they are much less likely to support candidates who push the strict MAGA agenda. Reports note that the base is shrinking and isolating the party.

Give it up, you're in a dying cult. The GOOD news - there's still time to get out. There are a number of support groups available. The MAGA stain isn't a permanent tattoo, it washes off quite nicely, same as dog poo.

A dying cult?? LMAO

13 minutes ago, HolmesEquivelant said:

A dying cult?? LMAO

You keep posting delusional, extremely biased crap (which is ALL provable to be false if you tried using forgotten brain cells). Why don't you stop wasting all our time - take up a hobby, take a walk? Regardless, I'm done with you. Buh bye.

Hegseth was not a combat soldier. His work in Iraq was a desk jockey doing civil affairs aka PR. He took newsmedia for staged interviews. He did not participate in any combat interactions. his limited time in Afghanistan was at the training school. The USA gives commendations and medals for tying ones shoes properly. The Bronze stars he received were for meritorious achievement. They do not include the V which is for Valor, that people who are in high risk situations face. It's great that he served, but please don't hold him out to be a hero, because he is not. The kid who was blown up by an IED while on patrol, or the aircrew that crashed while on a mission, or retrieved personnel from the field under fire are the heros. The person who serviced their equipment under difficult conditions is a hero. The man who was often pickled and enjoying a comfortable life with warm meals at the officer's mess and who had a nice bed and clean sheets to sleep in had it easy compared to the field personnel. That's the same man that's ordering $10 million worth of lobster tail and crab for his staff offices wow soldiers on the ships are having a hard time finding a good meal. Except has about as much respect for the rank and file as his pathetic boss does.

Hegseth is inept and a poor cabinet secretary. Trump oftentimes will confuse a polished presentation with one of substance, and Hegseth embarrassed himself and his nation deeply with his ridiculous speech about being overly aggressive, and not following any aspect of the Geneva Convention, while pursuing the enemy. The military does not pay him any regard other than the fact that they are forced to obey the chain of command. My guess is that the man is an absolute laughing stock throughout all ranks and files, we witnessed the somber tone on the faces of the high ranking officers, Admirals and Generals, and the rather astonishing lack of applause for either Petie or Donnie. I'm guessing at this point the military utterly despises them both, and has a great deal of contempt for the command structure at this point. 

They both like to play tough, they both like to act up, but they're both cowards and they are bordering on being traitors to their nation. And both of them would require boxes upon boxes of pampers and diapers if they were ever to face live fire in a real war.

Edited August 29Aug 29 by spidermike007

18 hours ago, Cameroni said:

It's simple maths. Key Square Capital made a lifetime gain of 2.9%, averaging poor and big win years out. If you'd put 2 billion in 2015 and kept it there until 2024 Soros would have made a cool 520 million USD in profit. Not too shabby.

Edit: On checking, it's seems the average annual growth was 2.89% not the lifetime gain, but still a poor return...

From AI: While a $584 million net profit is substantial in raw dollars, this 2.89% average return significantly underperformed standard market alternatives over the same period. For comparison, the S&P 500 averaged over 12% annualized returns during those exact years, which would have more than doubled that original $2 billion.

NB. I've no problem with Bessent per se, I just don't think the current administration's policies/actions give him the freedom to do the job to the best of his ability.

Edited August 29Aug 29 by SamSpade

On 8/28/2026 at 1:53 AM, Roadsternut said:

The evidence for Hegseth's tenure is rather more troubling than the rhetoric about restoring a “warrior ethos” suggests. The Department of Defense itself confirms that recruiting improved sharply in 2025: the Army exceeded its target by more than 10%, reaching its goal of 61,000 recruits four months early.

But recruiting numbers do not demonstrate that the force has become more professional or strategically effective, particularly when the same period has seen an extraordinary turnover of senior leadership. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Chief of Naval Operations, the Air Force Vice Chief, senior military lawyers and numerous other senior officers were dismissed or forced out, often before completing their expected terms and with little public explanation.

Whatever one's politics, replacing experienced commanders on this scale inevitably destroys institutional continuity and encourages every remaining officer to consider whether professional independence is compatible with career survival. This is pretty much what happened in Russia after 2008. In 2008, there was the Serdyukov military reform, supposedly to modernise Soviet style leadership. But Putin and Shoigu took the opportunity to politicise the military to ensure apparent loyalty not to Russia but to Putin. The result was sheer incompetence what it came to an actual shooting war.

The criticism cannot simply be dismissed as coming from the political left. The Heritage Foundation's own 2026 Index of U.S. Military Strength rates the Army overall as “marginal,” with only 31 Regular Army brigade combat teams against its own benchmark of 50, or 62% of the force Heritage considers necessary for two major regional contingencies. Heritage also rates the Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard as “weak.”. It demonstrates the absurdity of claiming that dismissing experienced leaders and demanding political loyalty is some obvious cure for America's military problems.

When a force already has limited capacity and major modernisation problems, purging its accumulated expertise and replacing stability with ideological uncertainty is an extremely reckless way to prepare it for a confrontation with a capable adversary such as Iran.

So we've lost our experienced "woke/DEI" leadership... Like the 4 Star General who promised to call China if the US was planning anything aggressive. Or maybe the Marine General who thought we couldn't do anything with the help of our "allies" (the ones who want us to foot the bill for their defense but turn their backs when we could have used some help). Somehow I don't see that as a negative.

On 8/28/2026 at 5:52 AM, HolmesEquivelant said:

Only the brightest and the best! Based on merit. not DEI.

Have your meltdown.

BTW, Trump’s Treasury Secretary is gay. Hired on merit, not sexuality. The way it should be.

If Trump ever finds out, he'll be gone in a second!

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

Hegseth was not a combat soldier. His work in Iraq was a desk jockey doing civil affairs aka PR. He took newsmedia for staged interviews. He did not participate in any combat interactions. his limited time in Afghanistan was at the training school. The USA gives commendations and medals for tying ones shoes properly. The Bronze stars he received were for meritorious achievement. They do not include the V which is for Valor, that people who are in high risk situations face. It's great that he served, but please don't hold him out to be a hero, because he is not. The kid who was blown up by an IED while on patrol, or the aircrew that crashed while on a mission, or retrieved personnel from the field under fire are the heros. The person who serviced their equipment under difficult conditions is a hero. The man who was often pickled and enjoying a comfortable life with warm meals at the officer's mess and who had a nice bed and clean sheets to sleep in had it easy compared to the field personnel. That's the same man that's ordering $10 million worth of lobster tail and crab for his staff offices wow soldiers on the ships are having a hard time finding a good meal. Except has about as much respect for the rank and file as his pathetic boss does.

Hegseth is inept and a poor cabinet secretary. Trump oftentimes will confuse a polished presentation with one of substance, and Hegseth embarrassed himself and his nation deeply with his ridiculous speech about being overly aggressive, and not following any aspect of the Geneva Convention, while pursuing the enemy. The military does not pay him any regard other than the fact that they are forced to obey the chain of command. My guess is that the man is an absolute laughing stock throughout all ranks and files, we witnessed the somber tone on the faces of the high ranking officers, Admirals and Generals, and the rather astonishing lack of applause for either Petie or Donnie. I'm guessing at this point the military utterly despises them both, and has a great deal of contempt for the command structure at this point. 

They both like to play tough, they both like to act up, but they're both cowards and they are bordering on being traitors to their nation. And both of them would require boxes upon boxes of pampers and diapers if they were ever to face live fire in a real war.

Hegseth has obvious "mummy" issues demonstrated by the fact he has to have his wife/chief advisor with him at all times. She even attends secret mission briefings (along with some media) on open social media.

And looking at his outfit in the pic above Bessant is not alone.

26 minutes ago, SamSpade said:

Edit: On checking, it's seems the average annual growth was 2.89% not the lifetime gain, but still a poor return...

From AI: While a $584 million net profit is substantial in raw dollars, this 2.89% average return significantly underperformed standard market alternatives over the same period. For comparison, the S&P 500 averaged over 12% annualized returns during those exact years, which would have more than doubled that original $2 billion.

NB. I've no problem with Bessent per se, I just don't think the current administration's policies/actions give him the freedom to do the job to the best of his ability

It's only a poor return if you invested at inception in 2016 and did not withdraw until 2024. In reality the annual performance range was from -8.6 to +30.64 %. So depending on which year you invested you could have made up to 30% gain, if you withdrew in 2022 when he made the 30.64%.

In the real world ALL hedge funds have bad years, it happens. Even Wellington Fund, the most successful hedge fund on Wall Street has had a number of bad years.

I would imagine no investor invested in 2016 and kept his money there until 2024, because Bessent's style of macro investment was known to be very high risk. He tried to predict the market, the hardest style of investment, so most people going in would have known that and would have withdraw within a short period of time.

This is what Soros did. His 2 billion anchor investment was a blessing and a curse, because it helped the fund to be profitable in the first year, but once he withdrew his money, which was always planned, investors followed suit and this affected the performance of the fund severely as it caused a run on the fund. Soros, by his own account got all his money back and did not lose anything from his Key Square Capital investment.

I think we have to be very grateful to have a professional fund manager in the administration, particularly a high profile one who worked with George Soros and is a Yale Economics Professor.

33 minutes ago, Old Croc said:

If Trump ever finds out, he'll be gone in a second!

He knew but it was irrelevant. Being gay wasn’t why he was hired. Hired on his credentials and merit.

I know that’s a strange concept for leftists to understand in the past woke, DEI environment. At least try.

1 minute ago, HolmesEquivelant said:

He knew but it was irrelevant. Being gay wasn’t why he was hired. Hired on his credentials and merit.

I know that’s a strange concept for leftists to understand in the past woke, DEI environment. At least try.

Just once try to make your point without the ubiquitous insult to the quoted poster. I know it's de riguour for the sect, but it would help your credibility.

11 minutes ago, Old Croc said:

Just once try to make your point without the ubiquitous insult to the quoted poster. I know it's de riguour for the sect, but it would help your credibility.

What was the insult? Pretty sensitive for a Northern Territory Mick Dundee type.

Appears you’re still in woke mode. Pity.

21 minutes ago, HolmesEquivelant said:

What was the insult? Pretty sensitive for a Northern Territory Mick Dundee type.

Appears you’re still in woke mode. Pity.

Was the strange, dated reference to a silly film the best put down you could come up with?

On 8/28/2026 at 10:05 AM, Cameroni said:

Scott Bessent worked with George Soros. He's an economics professor at Yale. He knows more about economics than HappyExpat57 could ever dream of. Nobody better to be at the helm of the economy than Bessent.

Indeed.

Scott Bessent is widely regarded as highly intelligent and capable, particularly in finance and macroeconomics.

He graduated from Yale, built a decades-long career as a successful macro trader, played key roles at Soros Fund Management (including major profitable currency bets), founded his own hedge fund (Key Square), and taught economic history at Yale.

Peers respect him for his analytical depth and ability to cut to the core of complex market and economic issues.