NoCalMike Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 Embracing and investing in alternative energy doesn't mean anyone is shutting off nuclear power any time soon. This is about a plan being in place for the future and getting the ball rolling. I don't think any Democrats said, "If I am elected, on day 1 my first executive order will be to shut down each and every fossil fuel energy source in the world." That isn't a reality and people trying to act like that is what is going on are being dishonest. Obvious in the present time we are need an "all options" energy solution, but there is a difference between having a vision for the future and actively seeking to put in place a plan to get us there eventually and merely sitting in the corner and nay saying anything that would upset the profits of the fossil fuel energy. No one is arguing about what we currently rely on for energy, but the technology behind alternative sources are growing, becoming more efficient and need to be invested in to accelerate the process. This generation, 100 years from now can be the ones remembered in history books as ones who set the framework for a change, or the ones who ignored the scientific community's data until it was too late because it would upset some shareholders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 Back to Trump and his election strategy. It doesn't surprise me that the Trumps are looking at replacing Pence. He doesn't really add anything, and they probably think a woman on the ticket will stop the fleeing of Republican women from supporting Trump. It's that simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 24 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: Embracing and investing in alternative energy doesn't mean anyone is shutting off nuclear power any time soon. This is about a plan being in place for the future and getting the ball rolling. I don't think any Democrats said, "If I am elected, on day 1 my first executive order will be to shut down each and every fossil fuel energy source in the world." That isn't a reality and people trying to act like that is what is going on are being dishonest. A presidential term is 4 to 8 years, so I think we very much are talking short term. I don’t think anyone is going to shut off the power day one, but with the clock ticking on global warming we aren’t talking about things happening far off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 12 minutes ago, Destino said: A presidential term is 4 to 8 years, so I think we very much are talking short term. I don’t think anyone is going to shut off the power day one, but with the clock ticking on global warming we aren’t talking about things happening far off. Ok so with that said, the further we delay, stall, fumble around on getting a plan in place, isn't it increasingly likely that more extreme measures will continue to be proposed and pushed due to the continued non-action. It would be like ignoring a paper cut because "hey, it's a cut, but it doesn't hurt me a ton right now, just more of a minor inconvenience" until it gets infected, spreads, turns gangrene, then requires amputation and being surprised such an drastic measure is being taken. The longer we wait on taking action, the more "extreme" the plans will have to be due to having less time remaining to address the issue. The fossil fuel industries know they are on borrowed time. The change will come one way or another, however their stance on the issue is to soak up as any resources to make as much profit for the time being, and who wants to bet they will be the first ones to get their tentacles into the alternative energy industry once they deem it is profit-worthy enough to make the switch? This is about money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 The NG boom has resulted in greatly reducing our CO2 output, and can do it much more....along with adding to our financial security/recovery. hug a fracker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmarydu Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 2 minutes ago, twa said: hug a fracker. ...if you enjoy drinking water while it's on fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShredSkins Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 3 minutes ago, skinsmarydu said: ...if you enjoy drinking water while it's on fire. Oklahoman here. The earthquakes were a lot of fun too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted September 5, 2019 Author Share Posted September 5, 2019 3 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said: Back to Trump and his election strategy. It doesn't surprise me that the Trumps are looking at replacing Pence. He doesn't really add anything, and they probably think a woman on the ticket will stop the fleeing of Republican women from supporting Trump. It's that simple. I think it's happening that Pence is booted from the ticket. Trump putting a woman on the ticket won't really help him. The women who voted for Trump in 2016, when push comes to shove; will vote for him again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 3 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said: I think it's happening that Pence is booted from the ticket. Trump putting a woman on the ticket won't really help him. The women who voted for Trump in 2016, when push comes to shove; will vote for him again. I agree that the diehard Trump women will vote for him. I'm seeing articles where some Republican women will not. Whether they vote for the Democrat or a third party/independent remains to be seen. His support among women is tanking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 Update a month later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted September 5, 2019 Share Posted September 5, 2019 I like that **** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 8 hours ago, skinsmarydu said: ...if you enjoy drinking water while it's on fire. you know fish **** in that **** right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 Did y’all already talk about Biden going to this fundraiser? What’s up with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 Unpopular person with no chance of being elected announces he will not run for President. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/former-starbucks-chief-executive-howard-schultz-announces-he-will-not-run-for-president/2019/09/05/230b0fa2-d046-11e9-87fa-8501a456c003_story.html Quote Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz formally abandoned his pursuit of an independent campaign for president Friday, telling his supporters in a letter that he found it tougher than he expected to capture the attention of moderate voters and that he didn’t want to risk reelecting President Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooked Crack Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 I hereby announce that I'm not running, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 Republicans altering election law to help out the Party? I'm shocked. Anybody else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted September 6, 2019 Author Share Posted September 6, 2019 30 minutes ago, Larry said: Republicans altering election law to help out the Party? I'm shocked. Anybody else? What is the fear? Trump is going to win every state. Do they really fear a large protest vote in the GOP primary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 So I guess all of the GOP complaining that the DNC was fixing the primary for Hillary in 2016, will be totally up in arms over this? Oh, nah? Ok..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 But how would they feed their families on only a few billion dollars to go around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 Remembering IMO one of the best segments I've seen on The Daily Show. Title was "World of Class Warfare". Seems the Dems were proposing to eliminate the Bush tax cut on the top 1%, which would have raised the tax rate by 2% on income above $100K/year. Cut to footage of every single prominent Republican announcing that this proposal can't possibly be done, because it would only increase tax revenue by $240B, and that's not enough to completely eliminate the deficit, so it can't even be considered. Break for commercial. The second segment of the show was a report that the Republicans have a new talking point, which they're using to promote their notion that it's grossy unfair that the bottom 47% of tax returns pay no income tax. (They pay 6.75 federal tax, but it's not called the income tax.) And this is grossly unfair, and the Republicans have a new sound bite that they've been told to push, to aid in their plan that we need to raise taxes on people who make less than $15K/year. Cut to footage of every singe prominant Republican saying "skn in the game". Segment ends with Jon observing that he's done some math, and this analysis indicates that, if we take half of everything they own from these people, it will raise . . . $240B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 4 hours ago, Larry said: Republicans altering election law to help out the Party? I'm shocked. Anybody else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted September 6, 2019 Share Posted September 6, 2019 4 hours ago, Larry said: Remembering IMO one of the best segments I've seen on The Daily Show. Title was "World of Class Warfare". Seems the Dems were proposing to eliminate the Bush tax cut on the top 1%, which would have raised the tax rate by 2% on income above $100K/year. Cut to footage of every single prominent Republican announcing that this proposal can't possibly be done, because it would only increase tax revenue by $240B, and that's not enough to completely eliminate the deficit, so it can't even be considered. Break for commercial. The second segment of the show was a report that the Republicans have a new talking point, which they're using to promote their notion that it's grossy unfair that the bottom 47% of tax returns pay no income tax. (They pay 6.75 federal tax, but it's not called the income tax.) And this is grossly unfair, and the Republicans have a new sound bite that they've been told to push, to aid in their plan that we need to raise taxes on people who make less than $15K/year. Cut to footage of every singe prominant Republican saying "skn in the game". Segment ends with Jon observing that he's done some math, and this analysis indicates that, if we take half of everything they own from these people, it will raise . . . $240B. It's quaint that you wrote that whole thing out, and I appreciate the effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.