|
Remember those people who watched James Cameron's Avatar and got suicidal because they wished they could live on Pandora? That's how I'd feel watching Al Gore's America.
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 16:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:07 |
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:Lets not beat around the bush here, if McCain won in 08 it wouldn't have mattered what his health was like because there's no way he'd have won in 12. But then there was no way he was going to win 2008 either so... He could have won in 2008 if he'd campaigned the way he did 2000. Sometimes I seriously think that the GOP really doesn't want the White House. It's easier to sit back and throw stones than to actually have the responsibility of fixing things. shadow puppet of a posted:Its been said that the first trillionaire will be the person that cheaply produces left-handed sugar. What?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:What? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagatose or molecules like it -- sugar isomers (may be wrong word, I only took intro chemistry)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 16:45
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:What? Like many other molecules and larger objects in the universe, sugar is chiral (that is to say, asymmetric) in the right-handed direction. So we have evolved to deal with right-handed sugar. Presumably a left-handed sugar-like molecule would not interact the same way with our bodies, likely just passing through for the most part without being absorbed into tissue. If one could make a left-handed sugar, it could very well taste like sugar while having minimal physiological impact. Which means the John Galt of sugar would print money until the end of time. Have a swiped image:  Edit: Sorry, I forgot this wasn't the chat thread. This is a bit of a derail. mdemone fucked around with this message at 17:09 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:And yet Palin was almost a heart-attack away from being POTUS. How the gently caress would that have even worked? Is there even an outside chance that she would have gotten better instead of worse had she had not to resort to Tea Party nonsense? shadow puppet of a posted:Its been said that the first trillionaire will be the person that cheaply produces left-handed sugar. I have no doubt the first zillionaire will be the person that lets you watch multiverse outcomes like cable tv channels. My idea of Heaven is God with an intergalactic holodeck that you can program with whatever alt-history you want so you can watch it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:36
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Is there even an outside chance that she would have gotten better instead of worse had she had not to resort to Tea Party nonsense? She was one of the proto-tea party types, she was never not in 'tea party nonsense', she just didn't have a name for it at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:37
|
|
|
mdemone posted:Like many other molecules and larger objects in the universe, sugar is chiral (that is to say, asymmetric) in the right-handed direction. So we have evolved to deal with right-handed sugar. Presumably a left-handed sugar-like molecule would not interact the same way with our bodies, likely just passing through for the most part without being absorbed into tissue. If it doesn't interact with our body enzymes, mightn't it have no taste at all?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:47
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:If it doesn't interact with our body enzymes, mightn't it have no taste at all? That is a chemical possibility but we've made it before and know that humans can taste it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:52
|
|
|
TheBalor posted:If it doesn't interact with our body enzymes, mightn't it have no taste at all? It does interact with the taste bud but not the enzyme that would break it down for energy. Unfortunately the effect of eating a lot of left handed sugar would be basically the same as you get from http://www.amazon.com/Haribo-Sugar-Free-Gummy-Bears/dp/B008JELLCA If it can't be digested it still has to go somewhere. e: awful app messing with my url tags Grapeshot fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:And yet Palin was almost a heart-attack away from being POTUS. How the gently caress would that have even worked? I would like to suggest the documentary Iron Skies for their take on this scenario.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Grapeshot posted:It does interact with the taste bud but not the enzyme that would break it down for energy. Unfortunately the effect of eating a lot of left handed sugar would be basically the same as you get from http://www.amazon.com/Haribo-Sugar-Free-Gummy-Bears/dp/B008JELLCA If it can't be digested it still has to go somewhere. Luckily L-glucose typically has a laxative effect. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:And yet Palin was almost a heart-attack away from being POTUS. How the gently caress would that have even worked? She wouldn't have been directly involved in any serious policy issues. A Palin presidency would have all the actual governing farmed out to advisors and aids. The only thing Palin would directly involve herself in would be taking petty retribution against everyone she perceives as having slighted her.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:She wouldn't have been directly involved in any serious policy issues. A Palin presidency would have all the actual governing farmed out to advisers and aids. The only thing Palin would directly involve herself in would be taking petty retribution against everyone she perceives as having slighted her. Plus a lot of hilarious, hilarious overreaches of power because she was too stupid to know better. "Whaddya mean I can't fire all the Dummycrats in the Senate. I'M THE PRESIDENT! I'M THEIR BOSS!" And, oh god, the potential for foreign policy disasters with that woman as diplomat in chief. Like, sombreros and the macarena playing to meet with Guatamalan dignitaries and poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:A quick glance at Wiki informs me that in 2014 two Americans were beheaded by ISIS. There was also that workplace violence incident the other month. I tried looking up beheading on the CDC's death report, but I'm not sure that's the right place to find that info.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:She wouldn't have been directly involved in any serious policy issues. A Palin presidency would have all the actual governing farmed out to advisors and aids. The only thing Palin would directly involve herself in would be taking petty retribution against everyone she perceives as having slighted her. One of the key skills is knowing who your advisors should be. Palin would be making decisions about who she delegated decisions to. That's what made Bush's presidency such a disaster - his own poor decisions were bad enough, but his habit of listening to idiots and putting them in charge was what really did the damage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
President Palin: The missiles are flying. Hallelujah! Hallelujah!
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:36
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:One of the key skills is knowing who your advisors should be. Palin would be making decisions about who she delegated decisions to. That's what made Bush's presidency such a disaster - his own poor decisions were bad enough, but his habit of listening to idiots and putting them in charge was what really did the damage. Pailin/Brownie 2016
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
 (while you can)quote:New Jersey Governor Chris Christie took steps toward entering the Republican primary for the 2016 presidential race, forming a political action committee and hiring staff for a campaign. http://bloomberg.com/news/2015-01-26/christie-said-to-form-2016-political-action-committee.html Who else big does that leave to make the first step? I know Rubio recently told staffers to prepare themselves, now Christie is making moves. Has Rand Paul done anything this month?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:She wouldn't have been directly involved in any serious policy issues. A Palin presidency would have all the actual governing farmed out to advisors and aids. The only thing Palin would directly involve herself in would be taking petty retribution against everyone she perceives as having slighted her. Well, she is a backwoods racist and almost certainly a raging homophobe, but I wouldn't grant her the credibility or the competence to actually weaponize HIV.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
William Bear posted:
Ironically Christie might be enough of a belligerent rear end in a top hat to survive the primaries without going crazy right wing. I could see him going ape-poo poo on anyone trying to call him a Rino. He could stake our a center-right position and just defend it like a rabid dog.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
I hear a lot of people hating Jeb Bush on conservative side(common core and immigration) and saying they refuse to vote for him. Would republicans just not vote for him or is this just empty comments
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Republicans will vote for whoever the Republican nominee is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:I hear a lot of people hating Jeb Bush on conservative side(common core and immigration) and saying they refuse to vote for him. Would republicans just not vote for him or is this just empty comments Freep's admin was banning anyone who said they supported Romney for months, but they all shut up and got in line once he had the nomination.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
bpower posted:Ironically Christie might be enough of a belligerent rear end in a top hat to survive the primaries without going crazy right wing. I could see him going ape-poo poo on anyone trying to call him a Rino. He could stake our a center-right position and just defend it like a rabid dog. That might backfire because he has an obnoxious kind of fire to him. Obama kind of opened up on Romney over the Benghazi commentary in the second or third debate (can't remember which) and it was that kind of restrained white-hot seething anger that is enough to seem legitimate while not a chair-throwing display. Christie, owing to his accent or manner, would come off like a total shitlord, calling people names, mocking them, etc. It's a tough act to play when you've been "the hothead" for years.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
bpower posted:Ironically Christie might be enough of a belligerent rear end in a top hat to survive the primaries without going crazy right wing. I could see him going ape-poo poo on anyone trying to call him a Rino. He could stake our a center-right position and just defend it like a rabid dog. the right likes his unhinged angry dog shtick when directed against liberals, they won't like it directed against them
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
About the Christie Obama hug, would that have been spontaneous or do things like that get arraigned beforehand?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:Freep's admin was banning anyone who said they supported Romney for months, but they all shut up and got in line once he had the nomination. Hilariously, jimrob (the admin, for those of you wise enough not to bathe in the vitriol that thread presents) then turned around and started banning people who mentioned the earlier bans of Romney supporters. It was one of the most Orwellian things I've ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
Christie is lucky if he stays out of prison at this point, there are a dozen serious investigations into his administration from local to federal, his best case in all of them is coming out being incompetent with no idea about what is going on in his administration. He will probably avoid any serious run as to not bring any more attention to his dysfunctional/corrupt as gently caress administration until a few years from now in the event that he is personally cleared.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
So is it even possible for a Rep candidate to win the nomination without loving themselves in the general? How do you thread that needle? Maybe having 3 "serious moderates" this time will draw a distinct line between them and the crazies.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
bpower posted:So is it even possible for a Rep candidate to win the nomination without loving themselves in the general? How do you thread that needle? Maybe having 3 "serious moderates" this time will draw a distinct line between them and the crazies. Yes, Romney still got 47% of the vote. All you need is a year with one of the following: 1) Bad turnout among Democrats 2) A candidate that attracts voters who typically vote Democratic 3) A candidate that increases turnout among the Republican base at a higher rate than he motivates Democrats to turn out to oppose him. 4) A recession or act of terrorism shortly before the election.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Missed this Huckabee jewel quote:Kurdish forces have driven Islamic State (IS) militants from Kobane, officials say, ending a four-month battle for the northern Syrian town. Fighters from the Popular Protection Units (YPG) were said to have entered outlying areas in the east of the town after the jihadists retreated. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
bpower posted:So is it even possible for a Rep candidate to win the nomination without loving themselves in the general? How do you thread that needle? Maybe having 3 "serious moderates" this time will draw a distinct line between them and the crazies. Certainly. Charisma is way more important than actual issues when it comes to presidential politics. The changing demographics of America may eventually put the presidency completely out of reach for the current incarnation of the GOP but we're not quite there yet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Yes, Romney still got 47% of the vote. All you need is a year with one of the following: Saying Romney got 47% of the vote is a little misleading about what it takes for him to win - he did, but because Democrats have an edge in the current layout of the electoral college he probably would have lost at like 50.5%.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Saying Romney got 47% of the vote is a little misleading about what it takes for him to win - he did, but because Democrats have an edge in the current layout of the electoral college he probably would have lost at like 50.5%. I know, but my point was that even with the fundamentals stacked against him, Romney still ended up close enough that a one of the other events I listed before could have won it for the Republicans. Some people seem to take "the Democrats have a structural edge in Presidential elections" to mean "the Republican nominee is screwed forever for ideological reasons."
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
bpower posted:So is it even possible for a Rep candidate to win the nomination without loving themselves in the general? How do you thread that needle? Maybe having 3 "serious moderates" this time will draw a distinct line between them and the crazies. I think you do it by staying in at least until Super Tuesday, no matter your outcome in the early states. The three moderates are going to be drawing from a different income stream than you are, you're the guy (prove me wrong Palin) who the base is clamoring for but the elites justifiably won't touch. Pick one of the serious candidates each debate and hammer them on every single departure from Republican orthodoxy. Don't worry about consistency, the people voting for you in the primary are going to vote for you because you aren't one of those limp-dicks not because you have an actual plan for the future. Now you've got to win the general. Open with a complete repudiation of all the dumb bullshit you just said. Buy entire hours of ads to explain how the Democrats are the tool of Wall Street and the one percent. Betray every single one of your backers, you've already got their money and any clawback attempts are going to make you look good. Don't profess new beliefs, just go out of your way to push Hillary (or whoever but Hillary) right. Talk about a guaranteed minimum income, while holding up a sign that says "I believe none of this." Claim every position simultaneously. Get elected by a wave of people who appreciate performance art, the twenty percent of Americans who will vote Republican even if Jesus is running as a Democrat, and generally confused voters. Bask in your new found power.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
Peztopiary posted:. loving lmao, that might actually work.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
This new candidate could win southern conservatives if it runs 
Mr Ice Cream Glove fucked around with this message at 21:21 on Jan 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Saying Romney got 47% of the vote is a little misleading about what it takes for him to win - he did, but because Democrats have an edge in the current layout of the electoral college he probably would have lost at like 50.5%. Someone threw up a map in the chat thread that showed Hilary winning even if Illinois, Nevada, Colorado and Florida flipped to republican.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:This new candidate could win southern conservatives if it runs  it would. it would, dammit
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:07 |
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Someone threw up a map in the chat thread that showed Hilary winning even if Illinois, Nevada, Colorado and Florida flipped to republican. Issue: It has IL going red while WI stays blue. That just seems absurd
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2015 21:32
|
|
