Access, Data, and Security
- Commenters question whether DOGE staff lost access when the office “ceased to exist” or whether a set of politically aligned contractors still retain keys to federal systems.
- Many assume mass exfiltration already occurred: copies of sensitive federal databases on USB drives and cloud systems, described as possibly “the largest PII breach in history.”
- Some speculate that other hostile tech or data actors may have integrated themselves into DOGE’s pipelines, though this is acknowledged as conjectural.
Purpose: Budget Fix or Project 2025 Tool?
- Initial optimism: some people genuinely believed DOGE might attack waste and cut the deficit.
- Retrospective view is overwhelmingly negative: DOGE is seen as a catastrophic failure on its stated terms (spending actually rose) and likely a net cost after lawsuits and operational damage.
- Others argue it was a “success” at its real purpose: advancing Project 2025–style goals by crippling regulatory and progressive infrastructure.
- There is disagreement over whether that connection was “clear”: politically attentive people say it was obvious; others note many Trump voters never heard of Project 2025 or believed it was a hoax.
Humanitarian and Foreign-Aid Impact
- Strong emphasis on the USAID funding freeze and suspension of programs; several commenters treat the resulting deaths in Africa/Asia and Ukraine as DOGE’s defining legacy.
- One thread notes USAID corruption cases but is rebutted: fraud does not justify mass defunding that predictably leads to starvation and preventable deaths.
Legality and Separation of Powers
- DOGE is characterized as blatantly illegal: violating the Impoundment Control Act by blocking congressionally appropriated funds, and breaching federal data privacy laws.
- Some describe the broader executive strategy as “do illegal things until courts stop us, then keep going.”
- There is debate over whether the executive can unilaterally treat laws like the Impoundment Act as unconstitutional; most see DOGE’s behavior as lawless.
- A parallel debate: whether a future administration should use aggressive (or even quasi-authoritarian) tools to punish DOGE actors, or whether that just normalizes authoritarian tactics.
Deficit, Entitlements, and Health Care
- Multiple comments point out that any real deficit work must focus on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and defense; everything else is budgetary “edges.”
- There is pushback that Social Security is separately funded via its own trust fund, and that talk of it as a deficit driver is often misleading or agenda-driven.
- Several argue that there is enormous waste in health spending, particularly Medicare fraud and private-insurer schemes, and that going after this could easily save tens or hundreds of billions.
- DOGE is criticized for attacking the wrong targets (e.g., slashing VA support contracts via superficial AI reviews) rather than systematically addressing major cost drivers.
- A running sub-argument: whether the U.S. has a spending problem or a revenue problem, with data and links cited on both sides.
Tech-Bro / Startup Culture Critique
- DOGE is portrayed as “all the worst aspects of startup culture” imported into government: contempt for existing expertise, hero-worship of young coders with AI tools, and “move fast and break things” applied to life-critical systems.
- Federal staff describe being treated as “deep state leeches” while DOGE behaved like it had executed a hostile LBO of the U.S. government.
- The human fallout is emphasized: destroyed careers, shattered morale, small vendors abruptly losing contracts, and humanitarian crises abroad.
Voters, Media, and Ignorance
- Long subthread on voter ignorance and media bubbles: many people did not know about the shutdowns or DOGE’s scope for weeks, relying on Facebook, TikTok, or partisan TV.
- Some commenters harshly label such voters as “dense” or “willfully ignorant”; others argue campaigns must strategically account for this reality rather than assuming an informed electorate.
- There is frustration that many people believed campaign denials about Project 2025 despite extensive pre-election reporting.
Democratic Resilience, Accountability, and Future Risk
- Repeated calls for investigations, prosecutions, and public naming of DOGE personnel, including references to hires with disturbing cybercrime-adjacent histories.
- Pessimism is widespread that elites (especially Democrats) will actually pursue accountability; many expect a “we must move forward” posture that effectively normalizes what happened.
- Some argue that, after Supreme Court decisions expanding presidential immunity, aggressive use of the same tools may be necessary to defend democracy; others see this as abandoning the rule of law.
- Several commenters fear that, because DOGE will be remembered publicly as a “failed reform” rather than as a crime, similar efforts will be attempted again—better prepared next time.
International Standing and Soft Power
- Commenters from allied countries describe a sharp loss of trust in the U.S. as a reliable partner, likening DOGE and broader administration behavior to Brexit-level self-sabotage.
- The abrupt withdrawal of USAID and other engagements is seen as profoundly damaging to U.S. soft power and as opening space for rivals, particularly China, to expand influence.
Foreign Aid Levels and Shared Responsibility
- One thread notes that, even after cuts, the U.S. still contributes the most foreign aid in absolute terms, and argues that BRICS and others should shoulder more.
- Others respond that the appropriate response is burden-sharing diplomacy, not unilateral U.S. pullback that lets people die while hoping others fill the gap.