The federal keyword lists that canceled billions in research funding
highereddive.com
highereddive.com
Also not allowed to use "solar energy", "Geothermal energy", "EV infrastructure", "electrification", "Hydrogen energy".
Welp, America, you either gotta kick this administration out, or enjoy cosplaying the 1800s.
Thats what they voted for, dont know why they would get rid of them now.
Of course he's done exactly the opposite (and more!), but it's hard to see that when we're being brainwashed by billionaire-owned media. Just like it's hard to see why the Democrats are just another corporate scam to profit the wealthy classes when we're being brainwashed by opposite-side billionaire-owned media.
I don't have a lot of faith or trust in the Democratic Socialists of America, but they might well unite most of the people (including Harris and Trump supporters) in common goals: healthcare for all, living wages, affordable housing, stopping the AI bubble and techno-fascism, etc. Basic stuff that's supported by most of the population yet despised by elected representatives from both parties.
One of the failures of the US media is to continue allowing these voters to hide behind such plausible deniability. They knew what they were asking for and they need to be understood as people who wanted this outcome.
It's ridiculous. No responsibility taken.
The only other obvious comparison is the typical expansion of executive power we’ve (unfortunately) come to expect, though like the previous comparison, with Trump it’s different by orders of magnitude.
Yes you're right, I absolutely did not mean to imply that. I just forgot to say "orange man bad" as a signoff. Thanks
So no, they knew, they just didn’t care. Or thought he was lying. Why would you ever vote for someone under the hope they’re lying? I don’t know, but they did. That’s, like, trump defense 101. He’s a liar, and somehow that makes him good? Shh shh shh… don’t question it too much.
Really all Americans want the same things, the things you’ve listed and more. The problem is the republicans would sooner die than give us any of that. In my state, the republicans have spent the last decade systematically destroying public school. You see public school is free, so we can’t have that. They’d rather fuck over hundreds of thousands of children’s futures than give poor people free education. It’s all about fucking over the poor, the black, the gay, the immigrants. Anyone else caught in that line of fire is collateral damage. Oops!
"The most transparent" president.
these people are either rubes, or else they heard the subtle dog whistles that implied other things, and thought the wink wink was for them and not the billionaire class.
https://economistonline.mogaocap.com/2013/02/03/us-economic-...
(this is sarcasm, by the way)
how's that iran war thing going btw?
That the administration thinks these terms signify "wokeness" or whatever is depressing. Not difficult to imagine research grants with military applications using these words. Follow the war in Ukraine much? Energy infrastructure is frequently in the headlines.
[1] https://finance.yahoo.com/economy/policy/articles/u-budget-d...
It would do us good if we remember this, because this sort of the basic state of nature that most people have lived under most of human history. I'm not saying this is how it should be, but a lot of people are still living in the pearl-clutched "but, that's against the rules!" despite there being basically no real rules for a decade.
When people realize that it's all nonsense, it's going to get weird.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence."
If they were effective opposition, half the party would be in prison right now.
All well described, with experimental numbers and everything, for countries in Africa and Latin America. Little did people realize that no, you can also apply this to developed countries when they suffer sufficient degradation.
Could be considered "imperial rebound", from all the School of the Americas decades in which the US made Latin America more violent, right-wing, and less democratic for its own purposes, culminating in the invasion of Venezuela. I'm sure they'd have started on Cuba by now if Iran had gone as planned.
But, yes, when this filters down, and it has started, there's going to need to be a significant amount of legislative strength shown in order to stop the wall from collapsing entirely.
I do not see how a prosperous future is possible for my family, so long as that future is in the US.
But of course the Democrats will try to keep their heads high and try to float over all of this mess instead of throwing the dirt back that gets flung around. It's not working anymore.
The damage the Trump administration is doing/has done is nothing that any future administration can undo. The relationship with NATO members alone is unsalvageable.
Trump personally made $3 billion during his 2nd term's 1st year. [1]
19-year-old high school graduate Barron Trump earned $150 million dollars. [2]
Also, Trump's children stand to profit from a $1.6 billion mining deal that Trump cut as president this term - 'Kaz Resources'. [3]
Also, "The White House Intervened to Get a $620 Million Deal for a Company Tied to Donald Trump Jr." - 'Vulcan Elements'. [4]
Also, "Trump’s Sons Land Massive Pentagon Deal as They Flaunt Corruption" via "Powerus" a company founded last year and which merged with a golf club in March. [5]
The Trump family cryptocurrency company received a $500m investment by the Emirati royal family, before the Trump admin announced that the Emirates would be allowed to import enough Nvidia AI chips to build the largest AI campus outside the US. [6]
Edit: As alluded to by walrus01, "The double life of Jared Kushner, mixing business with politics as emissary for his father-in-law Donald Trump … Ivanka Trump's husband has a career as an unofficial diplomat and a master dealmaker, juggling billions and focusing his activities on the Middle East and Near East. His latest coup, carried out with the Saudi sovereign wealth fund, was the $55 billion acquisition of video game giant Electronic Arts." [8]
While Trump and his family have made billions during Trump's first year back as president, for an example of how Republicans treated Biden family finances: in 2018, while Biden was out of office, Biden received a check from his brother with "loan repayment" written on it for 200K. Despite that Biden was not in office then, and the small amount (compared to not just thousands or even millions, but billions that Trump and his family have made in Trump's first year back in office), 5 years later, in 2023, Republicans were still investigating that $200K loan repayment. [7]
[1] https://theweek.com/politics/donald-trump-presidency-wealth
[2] https://www.timesnownews.com/world/us/us-news/how-did-barron...
[3] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/28/world/europe/trump-lutnic...
[4] https://www.propublica.org/article/donald-trump-jr-vulcan-de...
[5] https://newrepublic.com/post/209840/donald-jr-eric-trump-mil...
[6] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/02/trump-uae-cr...
[7] https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/31/politics/fact-check-evide...
[8] https://www.lemonde.fr/en/economy/article/2025/10/07/the-dou...
Republicans spent years focusing on a potential deal that Joe had quickly said no to, which was while Joe was out of office anyway. Meanwhile Trump in both term 1 and term 2 has been actively getting foreign income, but crickets. (I realize you said /s.)
“We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected,” he said. “When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down so that the EPA can’t do all of the rules against our energy industry because they have no bandwidth financially to do so.
We want to put them in trauma.”
That was Russel Vought, head of the Office of Management and Budget and key author or Project 2025.
Trump also said, "a whole civilization will die tonight".
They are simply thoroughly evil. This is easy to mask as "stupid", but stupid people wouldn't be able to be so consistent.
I wouldn't call them stupid, but they are hardly bright.
I can't truly say since I've never talked to him (and I hope it stays that way), but IMO I simply cannot imagine someone doing everything Russell Vought has done to America, without being fairly smart. Maybe he's just acting as a proxy for smart people, but someone behind Project 2025 etc. objectively must be very intelligent.
¿Por qué no los dos?
There are actually malicious people in the world, and many of them like to pretend to be incompetent as a smokescreen.
You know it's possible for some groups of people to be a mixed bag of cruel, venal, greedy, feckless, foolish and compromised, right? Of course it's not likely that everyone in the administration is literally a recruited foreign asset.
"As democracy is perfected, the office [of president] represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
If there's a text to speech for rapping I'd really love to insert your sentence.
suno.com/song/56c551ae-4162-407c-855a-28dc21b9d9e5
'inspired by' edition
suno.com/song/da442a4a-0060-473b-b0b0-121076bdb5b8
But no, they still seem to busy on Twitter being angry about a Muslim Mayor in New York.
The idea of freedom of speech is to not limit expression of ideas counter to any one ideology.
Also, if corporations donating to political campaigns is speech, so should science funding be - which is now being restricted.
Their usual retort is: “we need more speech in the market place of ideas, not censorship”.
So why don’t they just fund right-wing-aligned projects instead?
Hypocrisy all around.
if you accept money from the government, you must also accept the fact that that money is political. complaining that losing a barely earned privilege is a loss of freedom of speech is a fucking slap in the face of people who have actually fought hard for freedom of speech.
It has been made political relatively recently. That’s one of my issues.
Please also read the first amendment.
The government is and always has been the primary driver of science research funding. There simply isn't enough of a known payoff for private investors to bother and private philanthropists have never come close to making up the shortfall. Or perhaps more accurately the government stepped in because private individuals would not and the risk was falling dramatically behind the world in research.
Now new administrations have always been able to influence grant awards. But rarely have they been so ... bad at their jobs? Who really thinks a keyword list is the right way to filter grant applications?
People have always been driven by ideology but the current US admin is just so stupid. Shockingly incompetently stupid. Even if you agree with their ideology do you really want this clown show being the ones implementing it in such a ham-fisted idiotic way?
not true. in the us, the government funds only about half of all research and development expenditures.
> private philanthropists have never come close to making up the shortfall.
you are certainly not thinking about university endowments. Numerically most university professors are operaring from a startup budget given by the university, not a grant. even in an r1, most professors do not come in with external money.
> bad at their jobs? Who really thinks a keyword list is the right way to filter grant applications?
i mean. i dont know which is dumber. thinking a keyword list is a good idea for cancelling grants or thinking that a grant application is the right way to filter for good science in the first place?
Depends what you (and they) think their job is.
RAGE was one acronymn thrown about and name-checked by the vice-president "Retire all Government Employees".
Russel Vaught said:
> We want the bureaucrats to be traumatically affected. When they wake up in the morning, we want them to not want to go to work because they are increasingly viewed as the villains. We want their funding to be shut down... We want to put them in trauma."
Well, the alternative is to have a competent (debatable..) execution of a rotten ideology...
Trying to remove this or that group from civil life and push them into helpless silent situation is important free speech. Protesting this person is not free speech, it is infraction against free speech. Offending certain group is important free speech and they should grow a thicker skin rather then responding. Responding to that is infraction, because bigot has free speech right to never hear something that does not make them feel good.
A similarly daft group are those who believe in “states rights”, and they make the same mistake: they want states rights, unless it contradicts other things they want. It’s not a real position, they’re fascists.
Not sure if that would get additional funding or have it cut.
The point is in the twisted absurdity brought by the evil.
And I figure that's because our goals are different.
Banned Words List
EDIT: or working for these companies!! Couldn’t pay me enough to do it.
That's understating it. Musk was the lead role in the cutting, he'd have OK'd the list if not partially authored it.
And besides, when a regime asks e.g to "prosecute all intellectuals - wearing glasses will be a sufficient criterion to identify them" workarounds are not the point.
Granted, the methods used here are asinine. But I don't think USG research has ever been apolitical and there have always been special words that grant writers knew to use and not use. Part of being in research is getting grants and it has always been a silly game. This just seems to take the silly game to whole new levels.
Looks like they accidentally put some right wing conspiracy language on the list. No one would ever seriously call their own policies "social engineering" when the word is associated with dictatorship and cyber attacks.
Or it could be one of the conspiracy brained dead-eyed little brownshirts they sicced on the task that put it in there. Who knows. I'm not sure they even knew themselves.
If you don't particularly care for the life of cows, "looked a bit sad" and other false positive triggers become a sufficient marker for suspected "mad cow disease".
Why is this bad? The Administration is democratically elected so nominally represents the viewpoints of the majority people - why should taxpayer funding go to disfavored research?
>The UC researchers allege the grant terminations violated their First Amendment rights by targeting their work based on viewpoint and subject matter and have asked the federal judge overseeing the case to rule the revocations unconstitutional.
More weird fascist technocratic fantasies from academia. Why would you be constitutionally entitled to continued public funding?
Could you explain how the people talking about their experience having to avoid specific words in their grant request were somehow uncivil? I'm not sure I understand. Was the objectively ridiculous nature of the situation being laid bare to you uncomfortable and thus "uncivil"?
I'll take all the downvotes, I really don't care but if you can't see this then you're part of the echo chamber... sorry.
You know that, of course, which is why you refused to explain how the people talking about their experience having to avoid specific words in their grant request were somehow uncivil. Very dishonest and abhorrent.
The only one in an echo chamber is you, apparently one you've hallucinated into existence. The only 'individual' here being uncivil is you trying to gaslight everyone into believing any and all criticism of an administration is "uncivil".
And, no, I didn't downvote you.
I accept your concession.
I don't think anyone voted for the gov to use a crude, ridiculous keyword list with many more false positives than not to terminate the funding of any and all research that simply uttered a bad word regardless of context. I'm not sure why you're pretending they did.
I suggest you actually read the first amendment. Maybe you'll understand then.