Jump to content

berlinerbaer

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    835
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by berlinerbaer

  1. 14 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

     

     


    lol Those two are probably reporters.

     

    I don't know whether to think this is good or bad.

    I'd rather see a room full of pissed off Iowans, throwing at him take-out from any of the district's ethnic restaurants, or rotting ears of corn that they are unable to sell.

  2. On 7/26/2019 at 2:16 PM, Brisketexan said:

    It's not just the president.  Not even close.  It is the entire party in charge of our government -- the GOP.  And they have been throwing up roadblocks and actively attacking any efforts to mitigate climate change for YEARS.  If you don't think that has been a HUGE drag on our path to mitigating climate change, I have a bridge filled with unicorns to sell you.

    Look at where we are.

    Understand that it's woefully short of where we need to be.

    Now imagine where we would be if the machinery of our government wasn't actively FIGHTING AGAINST US.

    I'm heartened that politics is being taken out of the issue, slowly but surely. We have Texas, a red state, leading the way and communities like Georgetown going 100% renewables. State and local governments are taking the lead. California alone deserves credit for getting automakers to adopt its standards as the de-facto national standard, for example.

    I'll go on record to say that climate change denialism will be politically untenable at the national scale in ten years. It will be one of the things the GOP will try to sweep under the rug.

    It's certainly true that we'd be well on our way to fixing our growing climate calamity if it were not for the GOP's bullshit. Instead, our great grandchildren will be perplexed at why we let it get so bad, and they'll shudder to think how close we came to absolute disaster before things got better.

     

    6 hours ago, Axiom of Choice said:

     

    Do you have any idea how much damage the democratic party and their progressive supporters & associates have done to the environment with their absolutely ridiculous initiatives and policies over the last several decades, initiatives that continue to this day?  What the world needs is safe, reliable, on demand large centralized power plants that produce no carbon and other greenhouse gases.  As it happens, the world has had technology like that for many decades now in nuclear power plants.  Who do you think halted the expansion of the nuclear industry?  Many current democrat examples could be given that continue today with these initiatives.  Tom Steyer is anti nuclear and "bankrolled an Arizona ballot initiative that would prematurely close the state’s sole nuclear plant."  He also has large investments in non-nuclear renewables (and also coal and natural gas).  Strange coincidence.  There are many other current leading democrats who oppose nuclear energy, e.g. Bernie Sanders and Ed Markey.

    Also, democrats now oppose natural gas, which produces only half the CO2 emissions that coal does for a given power output.  Right now, the world has two well proven and reliable on demand power sources that can replace coal, one that has zero greenhouse emissions and another that cuts the emissions in half compared to coal.  The democrats oppose them both.  They even use fear mongering and pseudoscience to achieve these goals, just like the GOP.  Millions and millions of tons of carbon have been released into the atmosphere and will continue to be released for the foreseeable future because of the actions of democrats and their progressive supporters.  We could replace coal completely within the next couple of decades with nuclear and natural gas plants, but that won't happen in part because of resistance by democrats.  Imagine where we would be without republicans or democrats.  

     

     

    You should have picked a state that wasn't drowning in sunlight as your example. So regular is the sun in Arizona, that even Li ion battery technology at today's prices would be all that is needed to keep the grid load constant.

    Seriously, bro, Arizona has no need whatsoever for nuclear power.

    Your anti-nuclear conspiracy argument is rich when one considers that no other source of energy has received close to as many handouts over the past 5 decades. Nukes are a massive investment. Half of them wouldn't exist if it weren't for our government's strange obsession with too-big-to-fail boondoggles. I was greatly intrigued by the thorium fuel cycle just a few years ago but I've since seen prices for non-nuclear renewables and battery technology fall at such a rate to convince me that's where the money should go.

     

  3. 3 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

    One wonders if the Republicans wouldn't be better off at this point without Collins.  Her brand has really taken a beating over the last 12 months.

    It's Collins or bust for the GOP. I don't see any other Republican winning an open seat. Maine has really swung left fast.

  4. 4 hours ago, Js1 said:

    Pete Olsen is retiring.  R+4 district. 

    Hearing this on my drive home from work this afternoon was music to my ears.

    4 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

    That's interesting.  Most of that district is Fort Bend County, which is now pretty solidly Democratic.

    True, but the 22nd has been gerrymandered to exclude the northern deep blue portions of Sugar Land and Missouri City. It runs east into Pearland as far as Webster and south as far as Alvin. That's a lot of red ground.

    It's not a R +4. It was drawn up to be more like an R +10 or so, which is what it was prior to 2018. It is eminently flippable as an open seat, like TX-7 2018 flippable. The 2018 Dem, Sri Kulkarni, is running again and has almost $400,000 cash-on-hand as of right now.

    It's probable that the R who will try to keep the seat red will be none other than Troy Nehls, who is not seeking reelection as county sheriff. Some folks down here have strong opinions of him.

    Spoiler

    spacer.png

  5. 8 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

    I don’t believe there are reluctant Trump voters.

    Anyone even considering voting for him after the last 3 years isn’t worth it.

    And I’m so tired of hearing why the shitty decisions of Trump voters is the fault of people who oppose Trump. And being asked to bend and moderate to placate their retrograde viewpoints. And no one expects them to compromise.

    Just ignore them and wait for them to die of old age or diabetes or heart disease or opioid overdose.

    This is correct. Some voters who were reluctant in 2016 were corporatist Republicans who will vote for him again because red team. They are already counted in the equation. This thread should not be about them.

    A different, maybe smaller group of Trump voters should be the focus: independents who gave him a chance in 2016 but who then proceeded to turn on him and his party in 2018. I see no reason why these people would swing back around and vote for him again.

    The 538 polling shows a precipitous double digit drop in his approval in his first couple months in office, from which he has never recovered.

  6. 1 hour ago, freyguy said:

    A good 10% of my state and municipal votes typically go libertarian.  I at least look at the first 2 candidates and their platforms, but if I'm not sold on either, then on to candidate 3 or 4.  None of them won, but screw you and your 2 party philosophy.  Let my <1% get analyzed by the political scientists.

    I vote for who I think the best candidate of the pool is.  I do not treat it like a game of spades and curtail my vote against who I hate the most.

    I hope you looked at #3 or 4 with half as much scrutiny as you did #1 and 2, but I suspect you didn't. Like it or not, all the talent gravitates to the Dems or the Pubs and third parties are full of Whothefucks and Whatshernames. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are both utter trash. If you really did your homework, you would have stayed home instead of voting for one of those idiots.

    If you cared at all about third parties, then you would do it all in reverse and closely examine their candidates first and either stay at home or go with the D or R as a fall back.

  7. 4 hours ago, Voldemort86 said:

    North Carolina republicans are the nastiest republicans in the country. Actually no, Wisconsin republicans are the worst. Their maps are drawn to where win almost all of the seats with less than %50 of the votes.

    NC is a close second tho. NC is a very competitive state when you view it at face value. Presidential races always come within 3-4 points, but NC republicans cheat like no other. The state is about even from a partisan stand point, probably 55% repub and 45% dem, but the repubs cheat so hardcore in North Carolina. Look at their legislative maps. They had to do a redo of the NC-9 election.

     

    i don’t trust those fuckers at all

    A party gets desperate as its power starts to wane.

    Just watch as Texas starts really trending purple.

  8. 3 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

    The pro-Warren mass media blitz continues. If the establishment powers have settled on her as the compromise candidate, she can build some very-difficult-to-beat momentum.

    Wait. How come I haven't heard that Biden, Beto, Pete, and Kamala all dropped out of the race?

    • Like 1
  9. 2 minutes ago, Hornius Emeritus said:


    I almost can't believe that their strategy was  to use a fake heavily armed mob to claim that Democrats were inside cowering in fear (to use their term), like the rest of the world wouldn't figure it out in 2.3 seconds. Almost. 

    It's stupidity on a staggering level. 

    It isn't meant for us. Like everything the GOP does, it's for their base stuck inside the matrix.

  10. On 6/21/2019 at 6:34 PM, Gil Bang said:

    A buddy who’s a local GOP bigshot (not to be confused with a donut boy) says that Hunter will be forced to resign, and Darrell (the car thief) Issa will move to that district and run for the seat.

     

    We threw him the fuck out up here, so the cunt will move to a redder district where he could win again.

    Because North County >>> East County

  11. 3 hours ago, zork said:

    What I think is immaterial.  NPR is saying we will be counted whether we respond or not.  The law says if you don't respond you will be fined.  Simple really.  Unless you have government officials who are choosing not to follow the law.

    Why won't they fine those who won't answer the census?  Who gets to decide who is fined and not fined for not answering?  It seems we have a bigger undercount problem than is being discussed on this thread if the government officials in charge of the local census are not fining those who won't fill out the forms.  Or maybe it isn't a big deal and NPR is right.

    476.gif

  12. 4 hours ago, Js1 said:

    The 2020 Races don't look as bad as before:

    Alabama - Roy Moore or Tommy Tuberville give Democrats a chance - Tubs wins by 15+, or I vastly underestimate the power of college sports rivalries.

    Alaska - sleeper - Agreed. The force is strong with the Indie/Dem coalition up North.

    Iowa - meh - Honestly, Iowa is probably #3 or #4 on the list of flippability.

    Kansas - Kobach is announcing he's in next week.  Kobach is a huge unpopular loser after losing to a Democrat for the governorship - Garbage candidate, but this is the Senate, where the Supreme Court gets the rank and file Rs to fall in line.

    Michigan - hold - GOP could only muster 2018 loser John James - Not to mention Peters last won election in 2014, a crap year for Dems.

     

    Democrats could lose 1 (Alabama) but pick up Arizona, Colorado, Maine, North Carolina (4) + Presidency (tie breaker) and take back the Senate.  Don't discount Montana, Texas, Georgia and Kansas as potential flips. 

    1234

  13. On 6/14/2019 at 2:37 PM, henrygandorf said:

    i haven't taken an active interest in a lot of these races, but how are things looking to replace the individual dem presidential candidates?

    They don't need to be replaced if they don't win the nomination, right?

    If so, why the fuck are we still dealing with Ted Cruz?

  14. Whatever. Oregon has recruited well since Belotti. Chip Kelly was considered a premier college football recruiter while in Eugene, and he cheated too.

    They'll win because they're Oregon. They won with Belotti. They won with Kelly. They even won with Helfrich.

    They only need Cristobal to not screw up management of the program down the stretch like Helfrich did.

  15. I work and have worked with several Iranians and they're all cool people. Sharp as a tack, too. Your average American Christian is more religious. And just like the Russians and nearly everyone else on this planet, they know much more about us than we know about them.

    This time around we won't have the benefit of a no fly zone in place for a decade. We won't have warring factions to exploit like in Afghanistan. Iran's 80 million inhabitants makes it the opposite of Libya's large swaths of empty desert. The Iranians have hunkered down for 30 years, planned for every contingency, and have had the resources for adventures in Syria and Yemen despite crippling sanctions.

    No, this is all bluster. There's no way we follow through on this and incur certain casualties, for which nobody in the US has the appetite.

  16. 1 hour ago, BLKNSTY said:

    r/houston.

    A dozen pictures of golf to tennis sized hail from Sugarland to Humble.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    I'm glad I missed out on that earlier shit. Southern Sugar Land was bone dry until about an hour ago. Still plenty of time to get rekt.

  17. 10 hours ago, happyfunball said:

     

     


    Estimates is that the tariffs fully implemented has a negative drag on China’s economy of 1.3% while the US is only 0.1%
     

     

    If tariffs stay at 10%, then maybe. If they go up to 25%, the US consumer will for sure share the pain.

  18. Muller testifies in congress this month, China talks fail and tariffs go up, sending stocks down, down, down...

    When was the last war we started purely as a means of distracting the population? Was it one of the Reagan central American skirmishes? I can't even put Iraq in that category.

  19. 3 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

    As far as I can tell, most open US gun owners are more likely to support fascism than fight it. Especially, if there is an old white guy trying to make himself king.  They'll be the ones doing the military's dirty work for them.  The "silent majority" of gun owners aren't going to do shit except maintain a low profile and defend themselves if needed. Just like now. The best way to avoid that drone strike is to sit tight rather than band with 10 or 15 guys and declare your town independent. 

    An armed population is antithetical to an authoritarian government. Period. A dictatorship with the available resources will eliminate all threats to its rule, eventually from present-day sympathizers.

    The gun nuts will hoot and holler as The Others are rounded up, but how long is that sustainable? Will the old angry white men simply be content to shoot at the dark faces they see on TV for all eternity?

  20. Hey, I also want Trump to be tough on China. That's mostly because economic pain is the only way Trump's approval rating floor will go down, but there is also a little acknowledgement on my part that it's probably working to some extent and the Chinese need to be dealt with.

  21. 2 hours ago, GRHorn said:

    So I know y’all are all debating about how much socialism Venezuela has enacted, but can we agree that outlawing private gun ownership has put the average Venezuelans here in a tough spot? 

    Outlawing gun ownership isn't a socialist policy. It's authoritarian. You don't need to own guns in a well-functioning democracy. The founding fathers put the 2nd amendment in the constitution as a safeguard to democracy, most likely one that has outlived its usefulness.

    There's a more important lesson here for you to learn. Under the right-wing illiberal "democracy" you have wet dreams about, you will not be allowed to own guns. They will come for the brown people's weapons long before yours, but they will disarm all of the masses one way or another. Eventually.

×
×
  • Create New...