|
Sylink posted:Climate change wont do much damage directly to the American mid-country, we have the technology for the farm country here and the risk is much lower than the poorer parts of the world. Its not great but not the worst possible, search up a risk map. Climate change will continue to wreck massive impacts on the agricultural Midwest. Oh sure, I bet Monsanto will have new seeds that will help but climate change will hurt the remaining smaller or over-leveraged farms out there.
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 18:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 13:04 |
|
|
steinrokkan posted:They allied themselves with the Republican Party, the largest and longest running party in the USA. How are they responsible for who else affiliates with them, were people who voted Democrat also complicit on George Wallace's segregationist policies in Alabama, or affiliated with the KKK because they voted for the party represented by KKK member Byrd? If they voted for George Wallace, yes that's not that hard.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Space Cadet Omoly posted:As far as I'm aware, I'm not sure he can end the war on coal. Best I can tell most of the stuff he promised is unfeasible. We can always just directly subsidize coal mines.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
I wonder when the Hillary Trials will begin....
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 19:44
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:I just find it painful that the common thread here is that anybody who voted for him (which does not include me, by the way) is automatically a racist piece of poo poo. As if there weren't dozens of other possible reason to vote for him or dozens of reasons to vote against Clinton. Focusing all your hatred in one direction feels good, but it ignores the other causes and just pisses off the people who did vote for him for other reasons and makes them even stronger proponents. If you want to change their minds, it might help to actually listen to their complaints (which is, ironically enough, one of their complaints in the first place). The vast majority of people voted for him in spite of that racism, not because of it. Because when someone says "oh well, I just don't consider how the candidate will impact minorities in my voting calculus" that's a decision that further supports racism. Sure you can smugly say "I'm not racist, I voted for Trump because I hate abortions" but you are still fundamentally stating that the impacts on minorities are less important than your pet issues.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
Kro-Bar posted:I think we'll see a lot of self-sorting in the next few years. Red states will get redder and strongholds of progressives will get bluer. Which is how Trump won the electoral college.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:This is part of it. The other part is that American public education basically doesn't cover critical thinking. I didn't have to learn about philosophy, ethics, or critical thinking until I went to college. Our education system is based on regurgitating the answer from the book in almost every area up through high school, which is still where most people stop. I think the closest we get is teachers not liking it when you source Wikipedia on your research paper. Remember the Texas Republican Party actively opposed the teaching of critical thinking in school. Torpor posted:It might be fair to say that a lot of rural voters don't see racism as an actual problem. Among white rural voters, sure. That's just one of the more pernicious ways racism works in America.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Best case scenario he's a pre-TR "steward" President who mostly just makes speeches and has his cabinet do everything Do you think climate change is nbd?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
AMLOVINIT posted:The absolute truth. Except unlike in Brexit, a majority of Americans voted for Clinton. This is all about the fundamental advantages to smaller rural states in the EC and the disadvantages the Democrats face from having large populous states.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Full disclosure: I'm Canadian and am looking at this from the perspective of "how likely is Trump to totally ruin the world order and foster american withdrawal and decline" and as lovely as Gingrich is he's unlikely to do that as Secretary of State Trabisnikof posted:Do you think climate change is nbd? Or are you one of those pro-climate change Canadians?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:If a white unemployed guy from some god forsaken township votes Trump because he promised him a stable job, is he racist because he put his own economic interest as a deadbeat poor over that of some stranger in a different county. He made a decision that even in ignorance furthers the racist power structures of America. Fojar38 posted:No. Then Trump is going to gently caress what little momentum on Climate Change we had.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
ilkhan posted:Pretty much. I'm saying that racism, sexism, bigotry, democracy, freedom of the press, etc exist as a laundry list of things that if you choose to ignore them you're actively supporting those that do harm to our society and country. I'm not saying everyone must litmus test on who will help women more, but that if you say "I'm not a women so I don't consider how my vote impacts women" that choice supports sexism. And so on.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Arkane posted:Obama has really set a dangerous table for Trump: Lol someone hasn't gotten to GW Bush in their history class yet.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Arkane posted:How does GW Bush relate to my post? The only thing that applies is domestic surveillance, which Obama expanded massively. Right he called them "signing statements" Torpor posted:This is an unreasonable post. What specifically about that post is unreasonable?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Makes me wonder what's going to happen when the people who voted for Trump because they were tired of being hosed continue to get hosed. Blame the Lugenpresse probably. kaleedity posted:did white people vote for obama over romney because they're racist Neither Obama nor Romney was actively and openly pro-racist.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
Torpor posted:Of course because I have already concluded that all of the whites are subhuman racists Of course the OP never said that or implied it so you're full of poo poo, what a surprise.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Torpor posted:Disowning family members is an unreasonable request to make of others. Really? Under any condition? Or is actively supporting racism just not a big enough deal to demand it for you?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Berious posted:Only whiny pissbabies get that mad at politics anyway I personally think it is kind of lovely to call minorities dealing with racism and a pro-racist president "whiny pissbabies" but I'm sure you'll claim you were totally talking about something else.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Telling people to cut their family members out of their lives if they disagree politically is a terrible, lovely thing to do. And all it does is make political polarization worse. Some people consider supporting racism/sexism to be more than just a political disagreement. Like are all Americans fully human is a slightly more fundamental question than marginal tax rates.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
C2C - 2.0 posted:I doubt Roe v. Wade will get overturned so much as you'll probably see more & more of the stupid restrictive poo poo like building codes & admitting priveleges(sic) used to whittle the whole thing away. Trump's list of nominees all would strike down Roe v Wade
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
HorseRenoir posted:turn back warren noooooo They all will say poo poo like this so that Republicans will have slightly less ammo to poo poo on them with when Democrats try and stop the Make Wages Great Again bill.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:39
|
|
|
nurabsal posted:What reality are you living in, right now? A majority of Trump supporters are willing to tell a pollster they are racist. So it doesn't seem that far of a stretch when they're supporting the same candidate the white nationalists are calling a savior to the white race.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
nurabsal posted:I can accept that Racism was a factor in this race, as it certainly was in 2008 when our first African-American President lost every mid-western and east coast swing state that Hillary lost this year. Why not exactly? We have the Klan rallying already, the Trump effect is widely documented in schools and now the federal government, the last vestige of protection against voting discrimination and racial discrimination by law enforcement left in red states, now they're in the pocket of the "put the white in the White House" people? White Nationalism is now again part of the national political climate and gently caress yes we should be ashamed it is true, but we can't defeat it if we deny it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:Yes, but... what the hell do we do about it? I'm mostly concerned, as a journalist, because I'm beginning to suspect that reporting might be meaningless in the modern age. I started a thread to this effect a while back and everyone was like "yeah, it's probably hosed." I'm still pretty amazed at the considerable help Trump got from the media. First there was all the free air time, which I understand is Trump's big media trick. But they also let him get away with completely bogus statements constantly, from policy to direct quotes. Then consider that not even left leaning outlets pushed the fact he may doom the world on climate. If he is a man of his word, we might see a crackdown on the press, but that didn't seem to be a big deal to the media. Speaking of which, I wonder if he will release his tax returns lol.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:Bro. For those of you playing at home, this means the Bundys win. They will get to take our public land and and make it theirs, potentially for free. Same for mining companies, ranchers, loggers etc. It will be easiest to do to BLM land or National Forests. But easing development rules for mining etc on National Parks has always been a big goal.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Radish posted:The lesson is the Democrats pretty much squandered Obama's eight years without raising up a successor. I don't know if the plan was Biden vs Hillary and that would be that then when Biden's son died he lost interest so it was just Hillary running unopposed, but Hillary had so much baggage they should have scrapped it once the Benghazi stuff wouldn't go away. Whoever said she never controlled the narrative was dead on. They really should have been getting some young talent ready but decided that whoever followed Obama would be fine riding his coattails forgetting 2000 entirely. So what you're saying is the DNC should have more involved in rigging the primary?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
treu posted:Remains to be seen. And when if/when it happens I will cast my next ballot for whoever addresses the issue. Do you believe in Climate Science?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
treu posted:Yup, have a Masters' degree in the sciences field and fully understand the complexities. Then how could you support someone who will undo all global advancement thus far and openly denies the science?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
treu posted:If he doesn't then he doesn't get the next ballot cast for him. Again you people seem to not read. How can you claim to understand the impacts of climate change and then ignore them in the politicians you pick? You can't just pretend that because you only voted for some litmus test that you didn't endorse the candidate with these other reprehensible and dire policies. Why is trade policy more important than the impacts of climate change?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:36
|
|
|
treu posted:Pretty sure in 2 years when the midterm election comes up. Was this some sort of trick question? Lol we were talking about Trump right? So you're even wrong about this. Hint: the house doesn't have treaty authority and any senators you voted for won't be up in 2 years.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
treu posted:Everyone has a certain priority in their agenda that they would like accomplished. Do I want America to be 100% clean energy? Sure. But I have to focus on things I want completed in the short or near term as well, and unfortunately that makes the well-being of the financial situation of my community a top priority. Climate change will likely significantly hurt the financial stability of your community, especially thanks to Trump. You sacrificed our future generations for a pocket full of promises.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
OWLS! posted:Nobody's minimizing the problem, it's a loving big one, just a mass execution it ain't. America has always been a very individualist country after all!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
treu posted:The question was "When do you think the next time you get to cast a ballot is? Do you understand what can happen between now and then?" Sure if you ignore the contexts of your own posts: treu posted:If he doesn't then he doesn't get the next ballot cast for him. Again you people seem to not Who What Now posted:When do you think the next time you get to cast a ballot is? Do you understand what can happen between now and then? And since your one big deal is treaties apparently, the house does poo poo and the senator you might have voted for won't be up in 2. You don't understand the system.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
treu posted:Debbie Stabenow is up for election in 2018 and so are House representatives. What is your point again? You voted for Trump based on your concerns about treaties supposedly. But you also claim that if you don't like what you see, he won't get your vote next time. That's in 4 years. Not 2. The House doesn't vote on treaties so that won't help stop it if you don't like Trump's treaties.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
treu posted:Difference between believing and giving the opportunity to do so, pal. And you think that chance is worth the damage to Michigan and America from furthering climate change? quote:The Midwest’s agricultural lands, forests, Great Lakes, industrial activities, and cities are all vulnerable to climate variability and climate change. Climate change will tend to amplify existing risks climate poses to people, ecosystems, and infrastructure. Direct effects will include increased heat stress, flooding, drought, and late spring freezes. Climate change also alters pests and disease prevalence, competition from non-native or opportunistic native species, ecosystem disturbances, land-use change, landscape fragmentation, atmospheric and watershed pollutants, and economic shocks such as crop failures, reduced yields, or toxic blooms of algae due to extreme weather events. These added stresses, together with the direct effects of climate change, are projected to alter ecosystem and socioeconomic patterns and processes in ways that most people in the region would consider detrimental. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/MICHIGAN_NCA_2014.pdf
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
Ryan is losing his speakership so that makes Senator Turtle the most liberal powerbroker. OWLS! posted:My party removes the filibuster = good Boring, come back when your act/thought distinction develops
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
OWLS! posted:Fortunately, said president-elect has the consistency of mashed potatoes, and is more flipfloppy than my flipflops. He could say that the america would blow up the moon tomorrow, and I would be completely unsurprised. Chances of it actually happening though? Nah I'm more worried when he's spouting crazy conservative poo poo I've heard before. That means some interest group will yes-man him and congress into doing it. The congress is as spooky as trump.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 23:11
|
|
|
Guy Goodbody posted:Why the gently caress are you people not taking Trump at his word on what he wants to do as President? We've been through this poo poo over and over again So Mexico will pay for the wall?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Bulgogi Hoagie posted:After all this stuff in the US and Europe you seriously suggest more direct democracy as a great way forward? Probably a lot of people are in favor of getting rid of the Electoral College at this point.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 13:04 |
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:This would be quite nice actually Let's see how leftist of a candidate we can nominate in 2020 so we can really McGovern it!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:35
|
|