Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 236: The Obama's new house is half baked

(+) Yeah! (+)

This might be my best Jakyling ever

---

NFUN posted...

pyresword posted...

Isn't it physically impossible for that to have the intended effect according to thermodynamics?

All the energy used to create the ice still has to go somewhere.

Their strategy is to find water that's between the freezing points of pure water and ocean water (like 28F - 32F or -2C - 0C IIRC) and desalinify it so that it'll freeze... which runs into the same issue where it produces brine that'll mix with the surrounding water and start melting the new icebergs again in addition to the waste heat. so uh, not sure how this won a prize. I didn't read their actual study and see the math assuming it actually exists, but I'd be pretty surprised if it's at all feasible

Even in the ideal case doesn't this mean you aren't changing the temperature at all?

Of course taken in context with LotM's point I guess it's theoretically possible to be an overall win. (To say nothing of feasibility, however)
---

I seriously do not have words for how fucking stupid these people are, and I am looking at an article about how Trump literally wanted to drop nukes on hurricanes

Reg posted...

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/half-million-fewer-jobs-revisions -hit-trump-economy-n1046156

Government lying about job numbers to the tune of 500k fewer jobs than reported

So basically the only "good" thing going for Trump is a complete lie.

Explain to me again why he's some unstoppable juggernaut that's guaranteed to get re-elected?
---

Because the democratic party will give the nomination to someone who may be going senile.
---

I need some dumb fun to wash away the aggravating dumb

https://twitter.com/lindarchilders/status/1165767061424889856
alt angle:

the sequel to Ivanka gazes at Trudeau jpg
---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

Because the democratic party will give the nomination to someone who may be going senile.

As opposed to the man who clearly already is in the White House, who's one worthwhile accomplishment might be shot.

Biden will absolutely mop the floor with Trump. Not that Biden is a good candidate or will affect any worthwhile change, but all the Dem front-runners are likely to beat him.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

pyresword posted...

Isn't it physically impossible for that to have the intended effect according to thermodynamics?

All the energy used to create the ice still has to go somewhere.

Actually it could potentially be helpful, assuming it didn't just quickly melt again. It's true that creating the iceberg will be a net heat increase, but ice is very reflective (as compared to water, which is a heat sink), so if you're reducing heat absorption from the sun it should probably be a net win for the earth.

(No idea if the proposed technology is at all realistic, though).

Yeah, I assume their goal is increasing albedo. But there are probably way more efficient ways to increase albedo....like painting all the roads and roofs white.
---

Or....put some giant white tarps over some areas of the ocean along the equator.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

Biden will absolutely mop the floor with Trump. Not that Biden is a good candidate or will affect any worthwhile change, but all the Dem front-runners are likely to beat him.

I wish I could be this confident
---

TheRock1525 posted...

As opposed to the man who clearly already is in the White House, who's one worthwhile accomplishment might be shot.

Trump has a cult. His imaginary accomplishments are enough for them.
---

I'm more confident in Trump winning than any challenger at this point.

I cannot even comprehend someone seeing Joe Biden and thinking hes gonna somehow own Trump.

Is it possible he wins? Sure. Especially if we start sliding into a recession.

But what are his strengths? His only redeeming quality seems to be he can beat Trump, but why? What makes him stronger than Hillary?

People were actually inspired by her, theres nothing inspirational about Joe.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

But what are his strengths? His only redeeming quality seems to be he can beat Trump, but why? What makes him stronger than Hillary?

The idea here is that people are way more willing to come out to vote against Trump now when they know what he's like as President than they were 4 years ago.
---

The polling indicates that Trump voters are most likely to switch to Bernie, not Biden. There is no data about this either way, but I don't see non voters coming out to anti vote Trump. Voting goes up when people are inspired to vote FOR something, when they are disgusted by the government, but aren't inspired by the other option, they tune out and just stay home. People in this topic follow politics, but non voters usually only pay attention if someone catches their attention. Joe Biden isn't bringing those people in.

---

Biden is a regression to the mean as opposed to the opposite of trump. People don't like how polarized politics has become and think a center leaning Democrat that acts like a normal president will resolve that.

That's my thought at least.
---

GildedFool posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

But what are his strengths? His only redeeming quality seems to be he can beat Trump, but why? What makes him stronger than Hillary?

The idea here is that people are way more willing to come out to vote against Trump now when they know what he's like as President than they were 4 years ago.

But what does that have to do with Biden? You could say the same thing to support any candidate the Democrats could pick, even really stupid ones like nominating Hillary again or even nominating a Republican.
---

It's kind of delusional to think that people are going to be horrified by the Trump presidency and turn against him. Everything he has done, he promised to do during the last campaign.
---

HashtagSEP posted...

Like, literally every time abortion is brought up, it's "Evil baby killers."

What kind of sheltered, delusional world must you live in to think Democrats aren't called evil anymore and it's only the other way around

It's not that the Dems aren't called evil ever, it's that you're not going to find the vast majority of republicans calling them that. There's examples, sure. Hell, trump uses that rhetoric too. Yet when he does it's also regulalry called out or distanced from by those in the party when he does. If you're talking about the way republicans talk about them it's not in a moral way, not anymore. That's firmly something by the democrats on republicans. It was common with Bush and it's gotten very, very vocal with Trump. To democrats, Trump isn't an issue of policy, he's one of morality, an evil. Quite literally an embodiment of one who is at bare minimum corrupting an entire country's soul according to the frontrunner. Republicans meanwhile will insult democrats primarily by calling them ignorant, stupid, etc but evil ain't at the top or anywhere close. For democrats, it is.

As for the abortion example: that's beyond party. It's definitely viewed as a moral issue but Dems ain't exactly the point of contention there. Pro life might be the majority of republicans and pro choice the majority of dems but the category of democrats that makes that a thing is white, college educated - they're 94%. For everyone else combined it's 55%. For black democrats it's 50/50.
---

I appreciate how outright insane wang has become.
---

I want to live in the imaginary world where republican politicans ever call Trump out for anything ever. Like the closest we've got I guess would be Nikki Haley saying "This is so unnecessary" when Trump said "Too bad!" mocking Elijah Cummings for being robbed. (Which in turn got ripped by other Republicans and conservatives)
---

Sorry to say but if you think anything there is insane then you're either not paying attention or you're too close to the trees to see the forest.
---

You appear to be living in some form of alternate reality, wang.
---

Dancedreamer posted...

I want to live in the imaginary world where republican politicans ever call Trump out for anything ever.

... this has frequently happened. You even have a guy fruitlessly threatening to primary him. But this is a very, very frequent occurrence.

Does it impact their working with him, not really. But you can't be serious in thinking this if you've paid any attention to any of his bigger controversies.
---

Shaduln posted...

Biden is a regression to the mean as opposed to the opposite of trump. People don't like how polarized politics has become and think a center leaning Democrat that acts like a normal president will resolve that.

That's my thought at least.

Those people are wrong though. "Normal presidents" are what led to Trump in the first place. Bill Clinton led to George Bush. Obama led to Trump. Joe Biden will give us something equally, if not more hideous. Boomers in particular desperately crave a "return to normalcy" that is a fantasy. The increase in polarization is directly a result of the norms they experienced. All the income has gone to the top, we are permanently in forever wars for oil, we have militarized police and a massive government surveillance network and secret torture prisons, unions have been gutted, everyone is in debt, people are alienated and terrified and regularly mass murder their neighbors and children believe they will all inherent a world that is going to be increasingly bleak and uninhabitable. And both of the major parties have supported every single aspect of this every step of the way. The right wing outrage machine is going to prey on your grandpas reptile brain and scream about the evil socialist devils no matter who is elected. The folks who put out this garbage aren't going to unlearn these techniques working. You can't deprogram this conditioning by just offering up limper and limper candidates so you assume they will reasonably conclude oh, they aren't so crazy. You can't help grandpa. But you can get younger people involved if you give them a hope for a better future. Obama didn't govern that way, but it's how he campaigned. And it worked, because we believed it. Nobody believes that Joe Biden is our great hope for change.

---

red13n posted...

You appear to be living in some form of alternate reality, wang.

It would appear that way when you aren't aware of the one you're in, yes. Learn to take a step back.
---

Kinglicious posted...

red13n posted...

You appear to be living in some form of alternate reality, wang.

It would appear that way when you aren't aware of the one you're in, yes. Learn to take a step back.

what does this even mean?

You are literally spouting off a bunch of stuff that is not even a little factual.

Republicans have done nothing but tiptoe around Trump's controversies. Its always something along the lines of "I don't necessarily agree but heres me defending trump i support trump".

You are spouting off a load of stuff that makes corrik and ulti look sane. And thats hard to do.
---

Kinglicious posted...

... this has frequently happened. You even have a guy fruitlessly threatening to primary him. But this is a very, very frequent occurrence.

For such a 'very frequent occurrence' you've sure got a lot of examples.

Bill Weld is a libertarian (and was on the Libertarian party ticket in 20160. And Joe Walsh nor Mark Sanford currently hold office. The Republicans with any real power have said nothing about Trump. (Or when they have, they've also deflected to Democrats, like the weak comments from Susan Collins over the "Go back to where you came from" comments). Their repudiations (few and far between) have been tepid at best.
---

Kinglicious posted...

... this has frequently happened. You even have a guy fruitlessly threatening to primary him. But this is a very, very frequent occurrence.

this is a complete fucking joke of a sentence
---

Dancedreamer posted...

For such a 'very frequent occurrence' you've sure got a lot of examples.

Look up any of his bigger controversies then look at republicans' reactions. You'll find multiple republicans call him out, you'll see them disagree, sometimes quite strongly. Sometimes you'll even find Lindsey Graham opposes what Trump said.

How you jumped to the "Too bad!" Thing when it wasn't even something particularly controversial I'm not sure. All that tells me is that you don't actually pay attention to what people in both parties are doing, not even the leadership exactly. You're just paying attention to whatever bs incident with Trump. And not even recent ones considering the whole "they should go back" issue was just last month and had multiple republicans, from multiple states, call him out. Graham's reaction was looser there by telling him "aim higher" but others were pretty direct.
---

red13n posted...

Republicans have done nothing but tiptoe around Trump's controversies. Its always something along the lines of "I don't necessarily agree but heres me defending trump i support trump".

That description fits Graham about 60-70% of the time. If he's your only real example, again, you aren't particularly seeing everything and should take a step back. If you're asking for them to do something impactful against him you won't find many things, largely because it's already been proven to being a useless endeavour. But that's not the claim at all. It was simply pointing out that when Trump uses some extreme rhetoric, e.g., calling people evil, you'll see people in the party call out or distance themselves from him. That was the exact phrase I used and is what you're disagreeing with, which makes no sense as that's an outright fact. They do.
---

Kinglicious posted...

And not even recent ones considering the whole "they should go back" issue was just last month and had multiple republicans, from multiple states, call him out.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll482.xml
---

Grimlyn posted...

Kinglicious posted...

And not even recent ones considering the whole "they should go back" issue was just last month and had multiple republicans, from multiple states, call him out.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll482.xml

lol, they really took a stand
---

Grimlyn posted...

Kinglicious posted...

And not even recent ones considering the whole "they should go back" issue was just last month and had multiple republicans, from multiple states, call him out.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll482.xml

And keep in mind one of those four didn't actually condemn his words, they just said that they agree with the president on policy/everything, just "disagree with his tone." And another one is retiring/had nothing to lose.
---

Grimlyn posted...

Kinglicious posted...

And not even recent ones considering the whole "they should go back" issue was just last month and had multiple republicans, from multiple states, call him out.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2019/roll482.xml

...you do know what political posturing is, right?
in this vote there are multiple republicans who voted nay yet also explicitly said they were against what he said and called it xenophobic or racist. here though you've got four who explicitly joined the dems to condemn it along with a couple more of the nays who called it out or distanced themselves. now go to another of his bigger controversies and check the names on that. as you keep doing it you're never going to find a majority of the party but you'll keep finding an ever-changing pool of republican politicians who call him out or distance themselves. so you know, senate's easier to keep track of than the house for this.
---

Wanglicious posted...

in this vote there are multiple republicans who voted nay yet also explicitly said they were against what he said and called it xenophobic or racist.

Gonna want some receipts on this, please.
---

Because in fact, I remember more Republicans making a huge stink over Pelosi using the words "racist tweets" than those actually calling him out on it.
---

How against Trumps racism can they be if they wont make any personal sacrifice to formally condemn it

---

After some quick Googling to actually see the remarks Republicans had, I found that while some did make comments, the vast majority stopped far, far before actually calling him out and calling the comments racist or xenophobic. Most used phrases like saying they "disagreed" with the words, and most of them pulled the "both sides" card by saying "inflammatory language from both sides needs to stop."

EDIT: Hurd, one of the ones that voted Aye, seems to be the only one, or one of a very few, that actually called the tweets out as racist or xenophobic. Several in fact specifically said they WEREN'T racist or xenophobic when asked, and wouldn't use stronger language than calling the tweets "wrong" or "an error."
---

You're going to Kinglicious posted...

As for the abortion example: that's beyond party. It's definitely viewed as a moral issue but Dems ain't exactly the point of contention there. Pro life might be the majority of republicans and pro choice the majority of dems but the category of democrats that makes that a thing is white, college educated - they're 94%. For everyone else combined it's 55%. For black democrats it's 50/50.

So this appears to be true but is a pretty shoddy interpretation of the data. How are you going to claim it isn't a party issue and then point to a sizable demographic of the Democratic base as the reason? With this framing you're also ignoring that a 50/50 split is still more even than typical Republican opposition to abortion. Here is another poll.

https://www.pewforum.org/fact-sheet/public-opinion-on-abortion/

Like you I can also point to contingents within the Republican party here that are skewing these numbers - extreme conservatives and Evangelical Protestants. But these are key parts of the Republican base, and WHY it has become a party issue. You can also see that moderates within both parties are more divided, however obviously both parties know they have large bases that come down hard on certain sides of the issue.

The original conversation was about Republican rhetoric and vilifying Democrats as evil. They absolutely do, you can see Trump engage in it at rallies and it is the entire reason red states pass abortion legislation. You just aren't likely to encounter to much of this rhetoric online or in the news where the moderate and "facts and logic" crowd lives, they aren't the audience. Instead, that's where they use the strategy you mentioned of calling liberals crazy and stupid.
---

Yup, as far as most criticism he got there was mostly just "I disagree with that wording" shit or stopping at a basic "it was wrong" without saying what exactly was wrong without

and that's only the few gutless shitheels that would attempt going near a condemnation, plenty would just completely deflect to calling Omar a vile antisemite and skip past whatever Trump said.
---

StealThisSheen posted...

EDIT: Hurd, one of the ones that voted Aye, seems to be the only one, or one of a very few, that actually called the tweets out as racist or xenophobic. Several in fact specifically said they WEREN'T racist or xenophobic when asked, and wouldn't use stronger language than calling the tweets "wrong" or "an error."

Funny you mention Hurd as a specific example, because he resigned shortly after that. Really makes you think.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik, your partner is basically a single-issue voter about abortion, right?

does she think Dems are evil?

No. She thinks you need the Lord in your life to understand what you are doing is wrong and may God forgive your sins. Lol

But I am evil for watching horror movies.

---

Also lets keep in mind that Trump is easily the most popular active Republican politician and the face of the party

and I dont think Ive ever seen a notable non-retiring Republican call him out when he says the press is the enemy of the American people, which to me is his most dangerous rhetoric

---

Maybe we can ease tensions here by finding common ground. We all agree that people on the left frequently view Republicans in power as evil, correct? I dont necessarily believe evil exists in some absolute manner, but in a colloquial sense I absolutely believe they are evil.

So then the only issue is whether or not people on the right view Democrats as evil equally, or to
a lesser degree, correct?

is this really worth bickering about? Wang isnt saying that this makes Republicans better or anything, I dont believe. Just that their lines of attack are different.

---

I don't think it's actually worth bickering about. The only part I really actually felt was worth replying to was where he went "Oh, no, calling Democrats evil certainly doesn't happen anymore" and it's like... Dude, Google and you'll find dozens of examples just in the last few months.
---

Sure, I mainly take issue with the idea that Republicans don't use morality as an opposition tactic as if that's an outdated strategy to them. They do, but it does differ from how Democrats use morality. It isn't as major a focus for Republicans, but that's because they know exactly who they're targeting with it. Downplaying it is just inaccurate to me.
---

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1166033264093618177?s=21

New national Monmouth poll:

Sanders: 20% (+6)
Warren: 20% (+5)
Biden: 19% (-13)!
Harris: 8% (-)
Booker: 4% (+2)
Buttigieg: 4% (-1)
Yang: 3% (+1)
Castro: 2% (+2)
ORourke: 2% (-1)
Williamson: 2% (+1)

---

I just came.
---

Note that its a single poll of about 300 people (reported margin of error is 5.7%). Definitely not great for Biden, but if he really dropped anywhere near that much it will be reflected in other polls.

---