Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

sensible-med.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 340 posts

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#151

Post by poppingPaul »

PKop wrote: post #112
bongodongobob wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This government doesn't represent any sane informed person with a rudimentary understanding of even just the last 50 years of geopolitics. The system is clearly broken. First past the post voting is mathematically stupid. When the system no longer serves the people, violence has been the solution for the entire history of humanity. You know who doesn't like violence and prefers sign holding? The people with the boot…

No I'm happy with this result, you're not. You want to put a boot on my throat. You're unhappy with the sudden change of a slight, probably temporary shift of America being run by popular will rather than elite consensus, unless elite consensus changes to align with the popular will (hopefully). Liberal nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan was not sane. Continued escalation of Ukraine war was not sane. Mass immigr…

Violence has and will be a valid answer for the oppressed. I don't think you'll do anything meaningful to stop it.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#152

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

transcriptase wrote: post #54
rezonant wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He campaigned on doing exactly these things

You can tell who never bothered to watch a single Trump rally or campaign event by the fact that they’ll LARP being a deceived supporter.

Seriously, what is with this!?

Why are so many liberals pretending to be offended Trump supporters online? It’s obviously fake.

My company is majority conservative, not one single person I’ve even heard of is mad at Trump - except that he isn’t going far enough fast enough for them.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#153

Post by afavour »

seattle_spring wrote: post #148
afavour wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my point, he specifically disavowed Project 2025 while campaigning.

His words disavowed Project 2025, but his actions very obviously supported it. Reminds me of an apt quote: "I'm not a litigious man... that's why I have lawyers." -- Conrad "Skip" Meinhofer IV

It feels like we're bending over backwards to minimize a liar lying here. He did not campaign on enacting Project 2025. He literally stood on the stage at rallies and disavowed it. Yeah, he was lying and a lot of us knew it but that doesn't change what he campaigned on.

If a politician tells a bold faced lie we shouldn't minimize it by saying "oh but everyone knew what he really meant". He lied to voters.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#155

Post by jachee »

closewith wrote: post #43
alabastervlog wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many actions the administration has taken are illegal. Not sure if those related to NIH are, but if they’ve been firing people, odds are good, since they’ve been doing that wrong most of the time it seems like. Congress could change the laws, but they haven’t. Lots of this junk is simply against the law. The courts are moving relatively fast, as such things go, but it takes time. Congress is supposed to control spend…

Are you sure that the rule of law in the US is strong enough to avert a dictatorship?

If the military upholds their oath to the Constitution, we should never have a dictatorship.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#156

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

simscitizen wrote: post #63
tw04 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Practically speaking, when the majority of people who decided to vote voted for the person applying these policies, what mitigations are left? Impeachment. In a functioning government. Because the elected person campaigned on not doing any of these things.

And replace him with JD Vance?

We’re already looking at a likely President Vance if the DNC keeps pushing identity BS. No need to rush it.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#157

Post by arp242 »

sitkack wrote: post #74
jghn wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when the majority of people who decided to vote voted for the person You're not wrong. However the portrayal of a mandate is a bit of a media fiction. He didn't have notably more votes than any other recent president.

More people voted against Trump than voted for. • 77,302,580 voted for this administration (49.8%) • 77,935,722 voted against this administration (50.2%) From https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43191410

IMHO it's kind of meaningless to count the popular vote as it's not a popular election, which influences the results. Why vote in Texas or California? You already know who will win. Will that balance each other out? Unclear.

That said, I do agree with the broader point that a narrow victory shouldn't give full control of the complete (federal) government, especially considering how they're going about things. But fixing that requires serious changes to the democratic system and good luck with that.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#158

Post by jghn »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #149
dralley wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact, he had less margin than any election since 2000. Even Hillary in 2016 had a larger popular vote margin of victory than Trump 2024 despite having lost the electoral college.

You seem to be fixated on a vote system that we do not use.

Despite what people say, land does vote. And you're right: land voted for Trump.

But that's not what's being discussed in this subthread. The media portray Trump as having a popular vote mandate. That's not true

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#159

Post by Jimmc414 »

afavour wrote: post #78
Jimmc414 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Practically speaking, when the majority of people who decided to vote voted for the person applying these policies, what mitigations are left? Support candidates that appeal to the electorate. Find common ground. Resist demonizing the opposition. Moderates shouldn’t have to choose between polarized extremes. If you are intellectually honest you may see the ripple effect created by unfairly shutting Bernie Sanders o…

While I agree about Bernie Sanders I really can't see the justification in describing Harris's candidacy as a "polarized extreme". Sanders is clearly more extreme than her. (I don't think he's extreme at all, just that he's further to the left)

I wouldn’t call Kamala extreme per se. The extreme position is the doubling down on positions that don’t resonate with the electorate and labeling the opposition racist or traitorous instead of working to find common ground. One example of an extreme position dichotomy would be the choice between an unnecessarily porous border without transparency and mass deportation when the people would likely all agree on a steady stream of legal citizenship applications coming through the front door. Another instance might be that Americans would likely be largely in favor of trans rights if they weren’t bundled with allowing professional male combat athletes to unfairly dominate female participants. I think Americans crave common sense and it is nowhere to be found.

Re: The NIH is being slashed and burned, not "reformed"

#160

Post by jiggawatts »

chasing wrote: post #121
jfengel wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they should be telling him that. I'm hearing a deafening silence.

Have you seen some of these GOP town hall videos?

No… what are you referring to? Could you link an example?
Post reply on HN