Disclaimer: I am Canadian, so I am very biased in that regard.

I don't see a world where this ends positively for American citizens. There is a few different outcomes, but none where the positives outweigh the negatives.

1: Trump continues to engage in a trade war, eroding trust with USA's second biggest trading partner. This will damage both countries economies, although the USA will sustain far less damage. But the USA will have their global reputation further impacted, Canada is a respected country with strong allies, all for the next president to most likely back away from this.

2: Trump somehow convinces Canada to secede and become a state. This is the most unlikely outcome, as Canada doesn't want this, nor does Trump. There are undoubtably Canadians who would vote for republican/MAGA politicians, but it is not a large number by any means. If equitable voting was granted, it would be like adding another California to your federal elections.

3: Trump invades Canada/Annexation. This would be the dumbest war to wage. The border is unmanageable and Canada would fall under military invasion. But the US economy would plummet, countless American and Canadians would die, and the USA would become isolated globally.

I don't know why this is wanted by American citizens. No matter what happens, it is the average American citizen who would be paying the price for this. It just seems like another way the Trump administration is making the average American life harder, while pretending it will improve it.

EDIT: This is not a post about who will have it worse between Canada or the USA. Canada will, I thought I was obvious in that. This is about how any of this actually benefits Americans.

And regarding people commenting that Trump is joking around with the 51st state stuff. He is your president, what he says holds weight.

It just baffles me, that childcare and all the affiliated costs of raising a child, rises so much with the years. To the point that households are expected to have 2 working parents with good income. Not to mention that such households tend to sacrifice other things to accomplish that paycheck generally. Like working long hours away from home. Which spend time away from the kids.
Any ideas on to combat such a thing as a society and make kids affordable again?

After the Clancy trial and the new BLS data that says a large majority of new jobs have gone to women, the fairer sex seems to be a little more of a topic lately.

I was raised by a fiercely feminist woman but was greatly influenced by my very conservative grandparents. I struggle with wanting to raise my girls traditionally while also wanting to encourage them to achieve their dreams. My husband and I have taken on traditional man/woman roles and we are setting that foundation (I *can* change my oil, I just prefer he do it) but I dont want to pigeonhole them.

More than anything, I want them to be successful and happy, whether that is a SAHM or President.

So what roles do you think women should take? Do you think our society needs more of the traditional woman at home to restore the nuclear family, or do you support the more "girl boss" persona that has been highlighted lately?

How often do you (a conservative poster here) read other top-level answers before replying to the thread with your own top-level answer?

I'm curious because I feel like I see a lot of top-level responses saying something like, "What a stupid question, no conservatives think that way" while other top-level responses indicate that they do indeed think that way.

I watched an interview with Justice Barrett where she says that

"I believe in natural law and I certainly believe in the common good. I think this goes back to the who decides question. You know, I think legislators have, you know, the duty to pursue the common good. I mean, within the confines of the constitution and respect for religious freedom, etc. Um, but the idea that the court is well suited or that any court in the country is well suited to that task is a different thing entirely. I mean, the constitution distributes authority um in a particular way. The authority that I have is circumscribed."
.

Hamilton thought yes, he argued that government can and should pursue the the general welfare/common good of the nation. Would you agree with this?

Labor Day honors the accomplishments of organized labor in America. Other countries have related but different celebrations for May Day. I think it goes without saying that liberals broadly support unions and obviously celebrate Labor Day.

Conservatives' views in America seem to range from "Labor unions were once necessary but they've overstepped" to "Unions are corrupt" to "Unions are Communist". So presumably, Labor Day wouldn't be a holiday that conservatives would celebrate, yet I see quite a few flags out for this holiday in my right-leaning Texas town, though not as many as the inherently patriotic holidays like Independence Day.

To paraphrase Dale Gribble, do your people even celebrate Labor Day?

I still think it's pretty wild to think that people spent thousands on a "one of a kind" .png that could be screenshotted, but maybe I'm ignorant.

Does anyone even talk about apes anymore?

Curious what Y'all think

Whether it is high taxes, angry liberals, low tolerance for conservatives or policy differences

The UK is announcing new trade restrictions targeting goods and services from new Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, but no sanctions against Israel itself.

As a response, the US ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, said British businesses could face sanctions/bans from some American states.

What do you think of this development? - Should the UK restrict trade with these Israeli settlements? - Should the US care - Should the US impose restrictions/bans on British businesses in return?

I will say that I like it myself, as someone who is right-wing, but I have doubts that it will substantially help with birth rates by itself,in order to change birth rates you really need to crush feminism and abortion, but anyway, what do you think?

%22)

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-plan-pay-parents-stay-home-b3045544.html

There's plenty of situations where the mentally ill constantly get pregnant despite being unable to care for the child and their living conditions being dismal. This results in the child being neglected and possibly starving which is anything but a mercy but of course the child didn't choose to be here. I'm aware many Conservatives are against government assistance that would've aided in the survival of said child if the mother was mentally capable enough to sign up for it to begin with. All of this leaves us at whether or not the mother should've had a abortion to avoid this grim future?