Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

President Barack Obama/Vice-President Joe Biden Re-elected to 2nd Term Thread

@DCGoldPants

By @DCGoldPants
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

thebluefood

thebluefood

Posted
Posted
Still saying Obama ends up with 280+. Don't think this ends up being as close as some think.

I'm beginning to agree with you, especially after looking at some of the data coming in from the absentee ballots and early voting in North Carolina.

If Obama carries this state again, and it's looking like he might, it's bedtime for bonzo for Romney's Presidential hopes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
post #2645

In which Bang was advocating letting them die eventually.

(And I think he's just talking about coal. That's how this thing started. But it may have spread.)

You've said nothing to that portion of the subject, so what do you want to do?

What (I think) almost everybody else wants to do, too.

I think that getting energy from burning dead things is a "business plan" that has got to end. Soon.

I think it's guaranteed that 100 years from now, it will be a dead technology. That it will be on it's way out in 50 years.

That means that something will replace it. (Most likely, several somethings.)

I think that it would be Really Nice if those Somethings were Made in USA.

Ideally, they could do, for this country, what aviation has done for the last 50-75 years of American dominance.

(Realistically, that may not be possible. America doesn't have the advantages that we had, when we achieved a monopoly on aviation.)

But I at least want us to have a piece of it.

----------

And, I think that encouraging those new technologies is a legitimate function of government.

I think that government subsidies are valid, in rare occasions. I think the criteria include being a new, emerging technology. Something that is important to the entire country. Something that we know that we're going to need.

I think finding some new energy solutions fit those bills.

---------- Post added November-5th-2012 at 10:36 PM ----------

you willing to pay for them?

as soon as they become reasonable fiscally it will happen.

I believe I mentioned his frequent assertion that subsidies should never be used, unless an industry doesn't need them? :)

---------- Post added November-5th-2012 at 10:40 PM ----------

I hope we get to the point where solar panels are on top of all buildings starting with all the space on warehouses and shopping malls.

My gut feeling says that rooftop solar will never be economically viable. It's certainly an order of magnitude away from being viable, right now.

Now, what I think of as "high energy solar"? Where, instead of a square mile of solar collectors, you have a square mile of mirrors, concentrating all that light on one, single, collector?

To my gut, that looks a lot more viable.

----------

BTW, have I mentioned space colonization, lately? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bang

Bang

Posted
Posted
In which Bang was advocating letting them die eventually.

(And I think he's just talking about coal. That's how this thing started. But it may have spread.)

right,, coal has to go asap. Its bad for the environment, destroys the landscape, bad for those who mine it, bad for those who burn it.. there's nothing so mutually exclusive as the term "clean Coal'... it is anything but.

Other fossil fuels must follow suit.. as technology is available to replace it effectively.

And I believe that if we invested our oil company subsidy money into finding these solutions, we could. (Even if oil companies find the way to do it.)

For that matter, i'm also for investing subsidy money into retraining coal workers into new careers. No sense in just cutting them off.. they're part of the circumstance.

Someone once mentioned on this site that we do a "Manhattan project" type deal,, in which we gather the best minds and let them work it out.

Not a bad idea. The future of our people can be better as a result.

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Popeman38

Popeman38

Posted
Posted
right,, coal has to go asap. Its bad for the environment, destroys the landscape, bad for those who mine it, bad for those who burn it.. there's nothing so mutually exclusive as the term "clean Coal'... it is anything but.

Other fossil fuels must follow suit.. as technology is available to replace it effectively.

And I believe that if we invested our oil company subsidy money into finding these solutions, we could. (Even if oil companies find the way to do it.)

For that matter, i'm also for investing subsidy money into retraining coal workers into new careers. No sense in just cutting them off.. they're part of the circumstance.

Someone once mentioned on this site that we do a "Manhattan project" type deal,, in which we gather the best minds and let them work it out.

Not a bad idea. The future of our people can be better as a result.

~Bang

Any politician that "kills" coal will cause that party to lose a large chunk of several states. Please explain what, exactly, job a WV 20 something is supposed to find to support his wife and kids in a state that is literally driven by coal. Obama's stance on coal already lost that state for him this year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alexey

alexey

Posted
Posted
right,, coal has to go asap. Its bad for the environment, destroys the landscape, bad for those who mine it, bad for those who burn it.. there's nothing so mutually exclusive as the term "clean Coal'... it is anything but.

Other fossil fuels must follow suit.. as technology is available to replace it effectively.

And I believe that if we invested our oil company subsidy money into finding these solutions, we could. (Even if oil companies find the way to do it.)

For that matter, i'm also for investing subsidy money into retraining coal workers into new careers. No sense in just cutting them off.. they're part of the circumstance.

Someone once mentioned on this site that we do a "Manhattan project" type deal,, in which we gather the best minds and let them work it out.

Not a bad idea. The future of our people can be better as a result.

~Bang

ARPA-E was a great idea, started in 2009

Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy is a United States government agency tasked with promoting and funding research and development of advanced energy technologies. It is modeled after the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPA-E

This one looks promising... cheap grid-level storage could really boost competitiveness of alt energy.

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/bill-gates-backed-liquid-metal-battery-is-now-ambri/

http://gigaom.com/cleantech/liquid-metal-batteries-ambri-makes-the-colbert-report/

Sadoway had the idea to create a battery that used super low cost materials and he believed a battery based on liquid metal electrodes would be stable and scalable at an acceptably low cost for grid storage and renewable energy storage applications. A dirt cheap battery that could be used for the power grid could overcome the variable nature of clean power or the problem that the sun only shines and the wind only blows at certain times of day.

Sadoway met Bill Gates after the Microsoft-co-founder took an online class of his at MIT. Gates invested in the company, as did oil company Total, and venture capital firm Khosla Ventures; the Department of Energy’s high risk early stage ARPA-E program also gave Ambri a $6.9 million grant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bang

Bang

Posted
Posted
Any politician that "kills" coal will cause that party to lose a large chunk of several states. Please explain what, exactly, job a WV 20 something is supposed to find to support his wife and kids in a state that is literally driven by coal. Obama's stance on coal already lost that state for him this year.

So, you're advocating the government prop them up?

How conservative.

Here's what I say that 20 something ought to do.

Make better choices. Don't have kids he can't afford. (You know, we hear people scream this all the time about the "moocher class".)

Move.

Learn a better living in an industry that isn't dying.

Educate and better himself.

Sell cars. sell insurance. Sell ice cream. Be proactive and find a way.

There's a ton of things he CAN do excpt hope that politicians will continue to bail his dumb ass out to buy his vote.

(Counting on government.. is this a conservative plank? i don't think so..)

I'd be more worried about the 40 or50-something in the same boat.

At 35 i had to change the course of my life due to circumstances i didn't have control over.

it's hard, but It isn't impossible.

I could have cried and asked for the government to prop me up, but i didn't. I took what little money I had and went to school.

And now, life is good, and i'm working in an industry that is shaping the future, not crying out from the past.

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted

----------

And, I think that encouraging those new technologies is a legitimate function of government.

I think that government subsidies are valid, in rare occasions. I think the criteria include being a new, emerging technology. Something that is important to the entire country. Something that we know that we're going to need.

I think finding some new energy solutions fit those bills.

---------- Post added November-5th-2012 at 10:36 PM ----------

I believe I mentioned his frequent assertion that subsidies should never be used, unless an industry doesn't need them? :)

---------- Post added November-5th-2012 at 10:40 PM ----------

My gut feeling says that rooftop solar will never be economically viable. It's certainly an order of magnitude away from being viable, right now.

Now, what I think of as "high energy solar"? Where, instead of a square mile of solar collectors, you have a square mile of mirrors, concentrating all that light on one, single, collector?

To my gut, that looks a lot more viable.

----------

BTW, have I mentioned space colonization, lately? :)

I agree on encouraging new technology ,especially cost efficient ones that need help getting established,,,,sadly our policies encourage the opposite too many times

For instance I thought Ivanpah was possibly worthwhile,instead of a subsidized sea of Chinese solar panel crap

Bang....he doesn't want coal propped up....he just doesn't want them kneecapped as this administration plans

Tour a Chinese solar panel plant area and sing me that green tune

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bang

Bang

Posted
Posted

Bang....he doesn't want coal propped up....he just doesn't want them kneecapped as this administration plans

I should maybe clarify, coal isn't making any of my decision for me.. what i've written are just my thoughts on the matter based on the discussion we were having.

I'm all for letting people down easy.. I don't want to cut it off and immediately fire everyone,, this is why i said it needs to go asap.. as soon as possible.

Possible being the operative word. I don't think we should prop it up and prolong that any more thanis absolutely necessary to insure not only a better alternative, but also to not throw so many people out of work and onto welfare at once.

We must be more proactive to move forward and away from these fuels that are so bad for us in a great many ways.

And in that sentence, the operative word is "we".

When i first started posting on Tailgate, my main word was "unite"... i've pretty much given up on that.

But I sure wish we could. We've got a lot of problems that need work.

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PeterMP

PeterMP

Posted
Posted
I agree on encouraging new technology ,especially cost efficient ones that need help getting established,,,,sadly our policies encourage the opposite too many times

For instance I thought Ivanpah was possibly worthwhile,instead of a subsidized sea of Chinese solar panel crap

Bang....he doesn't want coal propped up....he just doesn't want them kneecapped as this administration plans

Tour a Chinese solar panel plant area and sing me that green tune

How much of the decrease in coal is tied to the rise of natural gas?

How much regulation are you willing to roll back to bring coal back?

Are we going to eliminate the Clean Air Act and bring back major acid rain problems?

At what costs?

Aren't net fossil fuel/energy jobs up in this country?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimboDaMan

JimboDaMan

Posted
Posted
Not necessarily: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/harts-location-election-results-2012_n_2080800.html

Hart's Location Election Results 2012: Obama 23, Romney 9, Johnson 2

FWIW, as of January Hart's Location had 6 Republicans, 12 Democrats, and 12 Independents. Assuming voters went with their affiliation, that means independents and unknowns went for Obama 9-3-2.

For whatever that's worth.

The Manchester Union Leader in generally conservative NH already has several snarling comments about "the dumbest people", "whining and snivelling", "Barack 'ain't yo money' Obama", etc. As a born New Englander I am shocked, shocked I tell you at this breach in the stoic Yankee demeanor.

edit: My voting experience this morning was exceptionally smooth. Arrived in the parking lot with my wife and daughter at 5:50AM. We were probably 50th in line. I went through my usual assessment of people in line, "good guy, bad guy, bad guy, good guy" :pfft:. Voting began promptly at 6AM with the call "Polls are open!". I'm enough of a geek to get a kick out of knowing that exact same scenario was taking place at that exact moment in thousands of locations throughout the East.

Line moved quickly, I chose paper ballot as usual from an innate mistrust of the electronic no-artifact machines, ticked off my choices and a couple of state constitution changes and bond issues, and was back home in my driveway at 6:20AM. Just can't imagine the ineptitude and deliberate obfuscation in places like FL with 3-7 hour wait times. My sister-in-law in the Tampa burbs had less than 1-hour wait for early voting - but she had to drive 45 minutes to the polling place. Virginia/Loudoun County gets props for doing it right year after year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
No Excuses

No Excuses

Posted
Posted

Line moved quickly, I chose paper ballot as usual from an innate mistrust of the electronic no-artifact machines, ticked off my choices and a couple of state constitution changes and bond issues, and was back home in my driveway at 6:20AM. Just can't imagine the ineptitude and deliberate obfuscation in places like FL with 3-7 hour wait times. My sister-in-law in the Tampa burbs had less than 1-hour wait for early voting - but she had to drive 45 minutes to the polling place. Virginia/Loudoun County gets props for doing it right year after year.

FWIW it took me more than two hours to early vote in Loudon County on Saturday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimboDaMan

JimboDaMan

Posted
Posted
FWIW it took me more than two hours to early vote in Loudon County on Saturday.
My understanding is that Virginia does not have early voting as such. You can "absentee ballot" in person, but only if you state you will be unavailable on election day and I think they still require you to fill out the absentee ballot application before voting, don't they? Did that slow the process down some?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...