View Full Version : Gonna Go See Bernie Tonight
I'm not precisely sure why, since my political stance is pretty firmly in his camp already, but it will be interesting to see the turnout and actually see the man in the flesh. Feel the Bern!
Yes! Definitely report back!!
Neat. Yes, please report after the event. Very interested in your take. He is super popular among young voters. My 19 year old would probably follow him around the country if he wasn't so busy with college.
Gardenarian
10-9-15, 2:50pm
I'm on the fence. I've been wanting a woman president since forever, but...
Looking forward to hearing about your experience!
Williamsmith
10-9-15, 5:48pm
I'm not afraid to entertain ideas that are completely foreign to me so I have visited Bernies website and tried to wrap my mind around all the promises he makes there. Some of them boggle the mind and make one ask, How's he going to pay for that? 12 weeks of paid leave mandatory plus 3 more weeks for illness and family leave? A $15 minimum wage? Free college tuition? Expansion of Social Security? Just to name a few.....
i know now you can't find someone you totally agree with but there some topics that completely turn me off. Climate change, and civilian oversight of police departments to name two.
And there is the flip flopping around on gun control that's convinces me that Bernie has sold out to the Democratic Party. In Vermont, guns are a sacred cow so to speak. He voted against the Brady Act and he voted to block lawsuits against gun manufacturers. He's a dang NRA poster child in the past. But NOW......he's talking like every other Democrat following the party line. They have told him that he needs to follow he talking points on gun control if he wants to be a nominee. That's a sellout and that's one I can't overlook.
I'm not afraid to entertain ideas that are completely foreign to me so I have visited Bernies website and tried to wrap my mind around all the promises he makes there. Some of them boggle the mind and make one ask, How's he going to pay for that?
The Wall Street Journal analyzed the cost of his promises a month or so ago. According to them his platform would cost an additional $18T over the next ten years while his tax plan would increase taxes by just over $6T over the same period, leaving a total additional debt load of about $12T.
The current administration has added approximately $8T to the National Debt over the past seven years, so it would appear that Bernie's plan would be more of the same, and the answer to your question would be: He doesn't plan to pay for it.
"Together, we must make sure that our children are able to grow up in a nation with opportunity for everybody. We must launch a political revolution which engages millions of Americans from all walks of life in the struggle for real change. This country belongs to all of us, not just the billionaire class. And that’s what this campaign is all about."
I feel, unfortunately, like that might have been lifted from Obama's platform in 2008. It's a populist appeal with dubious teeth. However, I still believe it and to me, voting for Bernie sends that message. I vehemently disagree with the gradual shift in political power toward mega-corps and a focus that puts money / profit for a select few ahead of human welfare for all.
Is Bernie ideal? No, but nobody else is either. At least he's putting his finger on the heart of what I think is wrong.
It's a populist appeal with dubious teeth. Yes, that's the thing about populist appeals, although there's a growing group of voters who eat it up.
Williamsmith
10-9-15, 7:16pm
Kib,
If you believe that the corporate interests run the country primarily through lobbying, bribery and cronyism.....then you can bet Bernie knows a lot of people believe that and listing income inequality as the top issue on his website shows how he intends to win the vote. Does he believe in all those promises? I don't know but those same corporations that run Obamas country and ran Bushs before him will run Sanders country after his election. His gun control flip flop proves this to me otherwise how do you explain his change of mind on the issue. He will do the bidding of the biggest donors to the Democratic Party and there are a lot of corporations on that list. He will have a change of mind every time he gets a visit from a wealthy lobbyist.
Republicans are are no different.
I hope you report back. I really want this guy to be for real.
I'm on the fence. I've been wanting a woman president since forever, but...
Looking forward to hearing about your experience!
I've been wanting a woman president since forever too, but Hillary is a corporatist and Bernie is not, so I'll be voting for Bernie in the primary. Plus, I'm an idealist at heart and most of Bernie's ideals are mine.
I also really like what this Liberty alumnus says because it corresponds with some of my biblical views: https://clyp.it/eusxalwe
Kib,
If you believe that the corporate interests run the country primarily through lobbying, bribery and cronyism.....then you can bet Bernie knows a lot of people believe that and listing income inequality as the top issue on his website shows how he intends to win the vote. Does he believe in all those promises? I don't know but those same corporations that run Obamas country and ran Bushs before him will run Sanders country after his election. His gun control flip flop proves this to me otherwise how do you explain his change of mind on the issue. He will do the bidding of the biggest donors to the Democratic Party and there are a lot of corporations on that list. He will have a change of mind every time he gets a visit from a wealthy lobbyist.
Republicans are are no different.
I hope you report back. I really want this guy to be for real. Me too.
I think it is a bit of a catch-22; there's no way anyone's getting elected in our two party system if they don't get the backing of one of the two parties, and that requires compromise. I don't know why Bernie flipped on guns, I suppose it's possible he simply had a change of belief about it as he aged, but I make no such promise.
Sadly, I really don't hold out hope for a non-corporcratic (?) government. We could elect Ralph Nader or Kim Kardashian, the power holders and their system for maintaining power is firmly entrenched. Sooo ... I'm raising my fist in objection to the underlying rot as best I can, but I don't really expect Change from Mr. Sanders any more than I expected it from Mr. Obama. But I will report back with any perceptions i come across.
Me too.
I think it is a bit of a catch-22; there's no way anyone's getting elected in our two party system if they don't get the backing of one of the two parties, and that requires compromise. I don't know why Bernie flipped on guns, I suppose it's possible he simply had a change of belief about it as he aged, but I make no such promise.
I don't think he's flipped on guns as he still supports gun ownership, but not necessarily of assault weapons. His goal seems to be to find a more moderate solution to the issue than either the two extremes. I personally tend to be more extreme in favor of 2nd amendment rights, so I don't necessarily agree with Bernie on this point, but at the same time, I can't justify voting for or against a candidate due to a single issue.
TVRodriguez
10-9-15, 9:50pm
there some topics that completely turn me off. Climate change . . . .
What? How are you "turned off" by climate change? You mean by someone acknowledging that it is a fact? Because it is a fact.
Tussiemussies
10-9-15, 10:04pm
I have decided that I will definitely be voting for Senator Sanders. He is on point with the negative issues facing the middle and lower classes of this country. It will be grest to hesr back from you about your experience!
...
i know now you can't find someone you totally agree with but there some topics that completely turn me off. Climate change, and civilian oversight of police departments to name two.
...
Good God--no civilian oversight of police departments? Hello, police state.
...
The current administration has added approximately $8T to the National Debt over the past seven years, so it would appear that Bernie's plan would be more of the same, and the answer to your question would be: He doesn't plan to pay for it.
http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2014/sep/05/barack-obama/obama-says-he-has-cut-national-deficit-half/
And his claim dovetails with one PolitiFact National checked in July 2013, rating True Obama’s claim that the deficit is falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.
Our rating
At a union rally on Labor Day, Obama declared "We cut our deficits by more than half."
The numbers back up Obama’s claim: Thanks to income tax revenues rising and spending on emergency assistance dropping, America’s deficit has fallen by more than 50 percent
from its highest point since World War II to a level $733 billion lower.
We rate the claim True.
As far as the national debt goes under President Obama, he would be hard-pressed to raise it by the percentage claimed by President Reagan; he hasn't even managed to raise it by the percentage achieved by President G. W. Bush. This article points out that debt rises during recessions, when there isn't as much revenue available from fully-employed workers. Arguably, this administration inherited a recession that we're barely climbing out of. Maybe if corporations kept jobs in this country and paid their workers well, we'd climb out faster.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/01/07/the-story-behind-obama-and-the-national-debt-in-7-charts/
freshstart
10-9-15, 11:16pm
I'm on the fence. I've been wanting a woman president since forever, but...
I'm in this spot, too. When I leave gender out, I'm way more Bernie than Hillary. I would love to see him. Ralph Nader did a q+a after a showing of his film in our tiny indie theater and that was a fascinating experience. It wasn't even sold out so I got to ask a question.
freshstart
10-9-15, 11:21pm
And there is the flip flopping around on gun control that's convinces me that Bernie has sold out to the Democratic Party. In Vermont, guns are a sacred cow so to speak. He voted against the Brady Act and he voted to block lawsuits against gun manufacturers. He's a dang NRA poster child in the past. But NOW......he's talking like every other Democrat following the party line. They have told him that he needs to follow he talking points on gun control if he wants to be a nominee. That's a sellout and that's one I can't overlook.
that was the one thing from getting behind him whole heartedly, but I saw the good he did in VT so would've tolerated the gun deal. I'm sure it is party pressure and I really don't care if that is what it takes to make him change his stance, I just want it changed.
On the rest, I have a feeling you and I will forever be canceling each other's votes out until one of us kicks it, lol
Williamsmith
10-10-15, 11:21am
What? How are you "turned off" by climate change? You mean by someone acknowledging that it is a fact? Because it is a fact.
I am turned off by the politics of the claim. Because the claim that it is truth or fact follows immediately by political solutions with real sobering consequences that affect countless people and their current life structure. All based on a so called truth.
For a topic as complex as climate change there is no one truth. Truth is always subject to context. Truth should not have anything to do wih a belief system. Climate change is nearly a religion. It has more to do with faith that fact. Finding the truth is a continual process. What we have with climate change is a declared point of arrival but the seekers are still seeking. If they had all the evidence we needed to declare it fact, then why continue the investigation?
Cigarette smoking causes cancer. Fact. End of investigation.
Climate change is caused by "............ Fill in the blank.
As the investigation deepens, truth will deepen. I fear a rush to judgement will have undesired consequences.
But then of course the urgency to act is part of the sales pitch isn't it?
I just wish climate change people, like you would approach it a little more carefully by saying something like.....this is what we believe is the truth but because of the endless complexity of things we realize that perhaps or maybe we will be enlightened more. So act or don't act accordingly. I don't want to hear.......ITS FACT!
Williamsmith
10-10-15, 11:26am
that was the one thing from getting behind him whole heartedly, but I saw the good he did in VT so would've tolerated the gun deal. I'm sure it is party pressure and I really don't care if that is what it takes to make him change his stance, I just want it changed.
On the rest, I have a feeling you and I will forever be canceling each other's votes out until one of us kicks it, lol
well freshstart, I hope we both get the privilege to vote for a very very long time.
Williamsmith
10-10-15, 11:28am
Good God--no civilian oversight of police departments? Hello, police state.
JaneV2.0
I am a retired law enforcement officer, how do you think I would feel?
Williamsmith
10-10-15, 11:33am
I heard that Bernie took a preemptive strike on gun control last night in Tuscon. He is expecting to get roasted at the upcoming debates and doing a little damage control. I think he got a real problem unless he can convince a lot of people he changed his mind because of personal conviction instead of political pressure. Advantage Clinton.
JaneV2.0
10-10-15, 12:01pm
I believe Bernie has more character than most politicians, by far. (His record, and his net worth certainly suggest that.) Not saying much, I know. His plans are probably pie in the sky unless he has a mass of people behind him, voting for like-minded candidates. If we shore up the economy be cutting back on imperialistic invasions, onshoring jobs, raising minimum wages, and the like we could make much of what he outlines happen. I don't know if we have the will.
I'll vote for Hillary Clinton if she's the nominee, but after all these years of naked racism directed at President Obama, I'm really not looking forward to years of naked misogyny from the same ignorant crowd.
As far as global warming goes, I think we should proceed as much as possible as if--phasing out fossil fuel use especially--but I've learned over time that scientific consensus isn't always scientific fact, so I maintain a guarded skepticism.
Gardenarian
10-10-15, 4:27pm
Climate change is caused by "............ Fill in the blank.
Sorry to go off-topic, but:
The current extreme climate change is caused by human activity, primarily the burning of fossil fuels. Fact.
catherine
10-10-15, 4:59pm
Many people, including the vast majority of scientists, have already filled in the blank.
You could take it up with NASA, though.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
Well, last night's excursion was interesting. Lovely balmy night with no bugs, that was a great start!
The whole thing felt a bit unpolished, I think I'm jaded from years of Big Presentations that probably cost more than Bernie's entire campaign collection. I also think he missed his mark with the audience a bit, we had 45 minutes of mariachi band, and then two Hispanic high school girls singing the national anthem, a native American teenager reading an essay about mining on sacred land and a 10 year old boy speaking about being separated from his deported mother. From what I could see, the audience was nearly 100% white and much more concerned with jobs, the concept of corporations owning the election and problems with education than ethnic special interests. So the audience participation was a bit ... limp.
Gun control, what I heard was about strengthening laws pertaining to gun procurement. No more gun show loopholes, "deeper and broader" laws regarding purchases. A short mention of perhaps banning new sale of weapons designed solely for the mass killing of human beings.
I had an issue because I kept comparing this to a Noam Chomsky lecture I saw earlier in the year. Noam got Into it, and i loved letting myself wander along with his almost stream of consciousness explanation of cause and effect. This was altogether different and not very useful to me. "bark BARK, bark-bark-bark-bark-bark. bark BARK! bark-bark-bark-bark-bark." Like a collection of five second soundbites strung together for two hours.
On one hand I don't know why anyone wouldn't vote for him unless they're already very rich and powerful. He's suggesting amazing and positive changes for ordinary people. On the other hand, I didn't get any explanations for how any of this is going to happen. "When wallstreet begged for another chance, we bailed them out. Now that we need help with free education, it's time for wall street to pay it back!" hmm. what does this mean? nice of them, maybe they'll volunteer to fund national healthcare and rebuild the road system too.
So ... I don't feel like this was really useful, I didn't hear ideas so much as a comprehensive wish list for America. It would be better to see him in debates.
freshstart
10-10-15, 7:24pm
I would've been ready to leave after 45 mins of filler, not there to see that, not that it doesn't have merit, 45 mins is way too much
can we have Noam instead? I'll take one Noam with a side of Bernie
Williamsmith
10-10-15, 8:06pm
Kib,
It sounds as if Lots of people are interested in Bernies ideas ; trouble is they are not much interested in Bernie himself.
Oh, the band was as we filed in, they actually started with the kids on the dot of 7. It wasn't taking up show time, it was just not firing up the audience at all, you could feel this vibe of ..."hmmm, how much do I have in common with this? Is this My guy?". They probably would have been more excited with a demonstration of quilting technique. He did play "Keep On Rockin' In the Free World" on the way out. :~)
Williamsmith, I think the trouble is what you and Alan hinted at earlier ... we could get behind Bernie even if he is an old white guy with out of control hair, but he's got to provide some meat. Right now he seems like a nice old guy who understands what people want and would love to give it to them, but he doesn't inspire much belief he has a clue how we'd get it, or at least he didn't last night. As I say, I'll vote for him to send a message.
Williamsmith
10-10-15, 8:35pm
Many people, including the vast majority of scientists, have already filled in the blank.
You could take it up with NASA, though.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
Even NASA itself fails to say it is fact. ...........
and I Quote: climate.nasa.gov
These capabilities -- nearly 30 years of satellite-based solar and atmospheric temperature data -- helped the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change come to the conclusion in 2007 that "Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations." But there's still a lot to learn about what the consequences will be. How much warmer will it get? How will sea level rise progress? What will happen to soil moisture, and therefore agricultural production, in a warmer world? NASA scientists and engineers will help answer these and other critical questions in the future.
notice the use of the words "very likely". And the admission that there is still more to be learned about the consequences.
Now let me put it this way. You are a juror in a homicide trial and the prosecutor has called his star witness expert. The expert states, "Based on my training, education and experience and my examination of the evidence I can say that the defendant is very likely the person who killed the victim. But there is still a lot to learn about the whole situation." Would you find him guilty and place him in jeopardy of the death penalty?
No doubt a lot of evidence has been gathered and much of it is pointing In the direction of a certain cause, but we are far from proving without a reasonable doubt that there is nothing further going on that we don't know about and that some of the conclusions being drawn are a based entirely on evidence and not speculation.
Furthermore, NASA just recently reported that based on new scientific investigation on the surface of Mars, there is evidence that liquid water flows on the surface. Where previous to this NASA would only say that frozen water was detectable on Mars. Does this mean there is life on Mars? Or is it fact that there is life on Mars? Imagine this......a quote from a NASA official says, "it's very likely." Those guys just can't seem to be dogmatic about anything.
Science is by definition the opposite of dogmatic, it's about re-evaluating concepts based on new evidence.
Williamsmith
10-10-15, 9:00pm
Thank you kib, I'm not trying to deny anything here. Although it sure seems like I have to defend that way too much.
Back to Bernie. There is a long way to go until election time. Thank you for reporting so candidly.
ApatheticNoMore
10-10-15, 9:30pm
we could get behind Bernie even if he is an old white guy with out of control hair
i really can't imagine caring one iota about the gender of the president. So yea!
Now let me put it this way. You are a juror in a homicide trial and the prosecutor has called his star witness expert. The expert states, "Based on my training, education and experience and my examination of the evidence I can say that the defendant is very likely the person who killed the victim. But there is still a lot to learn about the whole situation." Would you find him guilty and place him in jeopardy of the death penalty?
A murder is done and over, except for confirmation in a trial and punishing the murderer. This scenario might be a more relevant comparison. An FBI agent is in a meeting with the Secret Service. "Yes, John Doe is believed to be very likely to try and assassinate the president and we think it very likely that he has the means to make a real attempt at it. But there is still a lot about the whole situation, such as how or when, that we don't know." Would you take steps to try and thwart his 'very likely' future actions or would you just sit back and deal with them once they presented themselves as an absolute fact (ie, when he was standing next to the president's limo with a gun drawn)? Considering the potential catastrophic result of not acting I would hope the Secret Service would take the necessary steps well before Mr. Doe shows up next to the limo. By the same token I wish that we would do the same regarding climate change. To wait until "very likely" becomes "absolutely is" will likely mean lots of death and suffering that possibly could have been avoided.
freshstart
10-11-15, 4:41pm
By the same token I wish that we would do the same regarding climate change. To wait until "very likely" becomes "absolutely is" will likely mean lots of death and suffering that possibly could have been avoided.
this. And the waiting makes any type of repair or stemming the tide unlikely. I do not understand climate change deniers. How many world renowned scientists have to weigh in to sway the nonbelievers? It's not junk science. It's been punted as a political issue, which is dangerous to everyone on this planet now and in coming generations. We look foolish to the rest of the world because we are. I'm not commenting further because my mind will not be changed to swing the other way and I have no desire to spend one more second debating climate change. If Ted Cruz is calling deniers "flat earthers" and I agree with that moron on anything (just that one sentence, not one other thing), something hinky is going down.
On a good note, at least we're not burning the renowned scientists at the stake for heresy as we would have a few centuries ago. At least not yet. :)
There are those who still apparently believe after all this time that the sun revolves around the earth too. http://www.genesis-creation-proof.com/geocentricity.html
We really have a problem with science in this country. It's hard for me to believe that we actually were able to put a person on the moon only a few short decades ago (though there are those who believe that was fake.) I don't think we'd be capable of accomplishing an equivalent feat today in our current culture though.
Gardenarian
10-11-15, 5:44pm
Hi Kib,
Thanks for the feedback. I am concerned that Sanders has lots of good ideas but doesn't have the power to put them in action. (Kinda like our current president.) It's a tough row for anyone to hoe.
There's still lots of time, the first primaries are still months away, and in Oregon it won't be until May. I wish we limited the campaign time - no campaigning until 3 weeks before the election or something.
Still on that fence.
Williamsmith
10-11-15, 7:19pm
On a good note, at least we're not burning the renowned scientists at the stake for heresy as we would have a few centuries ago. At least not yet. :)
There are those who still apparently believe after all this time that the sun revolves around the earth too. http://www.genesis-creation-proof.com/geocentricity.html
We really have a problem with science in this country. It's hard for me to believe that we actually were able to put a person on the moon only a few short decades ago (though there are those who believe that was fake.) I don't think we'd be capable of accomplishing an equivalent feat today in our current culture though.
does anyone care to enlighten me about all the peer reviewed scientists who fit in the following categories?
Those that question the accuracy projections of global warming computer modeling.
Those that suggest climate change is due to natural processes.
Those that say enough is not known to really know the causes.
Those that say that even if the projections are correct, the resulting negative consequences will be hardly a crisis.
Are all these scientists part of a conspiracy to ruin the planet?
Regarding the reference to the moon explorations and our ability to accomplish things today......as long as the Russians keep running the uber rocket to the international space station....NASA astronauts will still have a ride. What a joke.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
does anyone care to enlighten me about all the peer reviewed scientists who fit in the following categories?
Those that question the accuracy projections of global warming computer modeling.
Those that suggest climate change is due to natural processes.
Those that say enough is not known to really know the causes.
Those that say that even if the projections are correct, the resulting negative consequences will be hardly a crisis.
Are all these scientists part of a conspiracy to ruin the planet?
Regarding the reference to the moon explorations and our ability to accomplish things today......as long as the Russians keep running the uber rocket to the international space station....NASA astronauts will still have a ride. What a joke. Yeah, about the moon business, We Are Number One! why? Because We Said So! oh.
I think jp1 summed up my feelings about climate change very well. The majority seem to be in agreement about at least these things: climate disruption is happening, and it has a man made component. Apparently ripping up the crust of the earth and burning a significant portion of what will burn affects the atmosphere. Who could have guessed. >8)
With this bit of information in hand, it seems reasonable to me that we try to curb the man made component or even reverse it if we possibly can, because these changes do not appear to be in our best interest.
Williamsmith
10-11-15, 9:26pm
Yeah, about the moon business, We Are Number One! why? Because We Said So! oh.
I think jp1 summed up my feelings about climate change very well. The majority seem to be in agreement about at least these things: climate disruption is happening, and it has a man made component. Apparently ripping up the crust of the earth and burning a significant portion of what will burn affects the atmosphere. Who could have guessed. >8)
With this bit of information in hand, it seems reasonable to me that we try to curb the man made component or even reverse it if we possibly can, because these changes do not appear to be in our best interest.
WARNING: huge amount of cynicism follows.....
I am all for curbing the man made component. I assume this to be accomplished by restricting the use of fossil fuels and adding additional burdens on producers and suppliers thereby increasing the costs of producing energy and fuel. We might wreck the economy but hey, we will save the earth. Like I said, Im all for it provided it's not my country's economy and not an increase in my bills. You know if Henry just had not invented that internal combustion engine......we would have been so much better off.....whoa mule!
hey, I didn't realize it but it seems a large volcanic eruption could counteract global warming and actually cool the earth. Wouldn't it suck if we actually reversed the trend and cooled the planet and then a stupid volcano put us in another ice age? I'd be kinda pissed about it. After all that good sacrificial work. Or worse than that, we get all this greenhouse gas under control and get things turned around but we do such a good job at it that the Eskimos file a lawsuit complaining it is so cold it is killing off thousands of species a day threatening their very culture and lifestyle. Somehow we have to figure out how to put a lock box on the thermostat once we get the earth JUST RIGHT!
I get six months of winter already as it is and 140 inches of snow. Kib ....you being in Arizona, I can understand why you might be concerned about heat. Me, I welcome a little warming. I'm not on the coast so who cares about sea levels rising. How do we know when to stop?
Do you think these scientists can suggest a way to add a duplicate earth to our solar system and we will just start all over again. Without the fossil fuels. All the deniers get to stay here.
We could only be so lucky to have a volcano solve climate change. It could happen. It's happened before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
But it seems far more likely that we'll continue to have hotter and hotter years: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/09/24/why-some-scientists-are-worried-about-a-cold-blob-in-the-north-atlantic-ocean/
Complaining that one's particular area is getting a lot of snow seems to be missing the point. The point being that climate change is ****ing with all of the earth's climate. On average it's all getting warmer. Some isn't but that's because the parts that are getting warmer are outweighing the parts that aren't. If the cold blob in the atlantic is what scientists fear it is then it's somewhat likely that Europe will not suffer warming but instead will suffer colding. All the people who live near sea level in warmer places won't much be placated by that if the predictions for climate change prove as accurate as they are "very likely" to be according to scientists.
I'm curious, Williamsmith, you were beating people up for liking our iPhones in another thread because of all the resources used to make them. Now you're beating people up for wanting to do something about global climate change worrying that any sort of forced reduction in our use of dead dinosaurs will hurt the economy. You seem to be flogging both sides of the coin. Do you have a bigger picture thought process going here in terms of what people should do, be expected/asked to do, or are you just in general grumpy about everything and think the world is going to hell in a hand basket with no hope regardless of what we do?
Williamsmith
10-12-15, 6:54am
We could only be so lucky to have a volcano solve climate change. It could happen. It's happened before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_Without_a_Summer
But it seems far more likely that we'll continue to have hotter and hotter years: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/09/24/why-some-scientists-are-worried-about-a-cold-blob-in-the-north-atlantic-ocean/
Complaining that one's particular area is getting a lot of snow seems to be missing the point. The point being that climate change is ****ing with all of the earth's climate. On average it's all getting warmer. Some isn't but that's because the parts that are getting warmer are outweighing the parts that aren't. If the cold blob in the atlantic is what scientists fear it is then it's somewhat likely that Europe will not suffer warming but instead will suffer colding. All the people who live near sea level in warmer places won't much be placated by that if the predictions for climate change prove as accurate as they are "very likely" to be according to scientists.
I'm curious, Williamsmith, you were beating people up for liking our iPhones in another thread because of all the resources used to make them. Now you're beating people up for wanting to do something about global climate change worrying that any sort of forced reduction in our use of dead dinosaurs will hurt the economy. You seem to be flogging both sides of the coin. Do you have a bigger picture thought process going here in terms of what people should do, be expected/asked to do, or are you just in general grumpy about everything and think the world is going to hell in a hand basket with no hope regardless of what we do?
dear curious,
As far as climate change is concerned...I am firmly in the camp of I don't know for sure if there is a problem, if the problem does exist what on earth can be done about it on a global scale and if we could do anything about it how on earth we could act as one to benefit all without adversely affecting some. Do you really believe mankind can act as one body and intuitively adjust the temperature of the earth so that it benefits all mankind universally? Are you then saying that some might get hurt but it will benefit the most so we will force others to do it this way? Do you not foresee a great big bloody mess being made of things? Nothing has ever been achieved on a global scale. It remains up to each person to spark a revolution.
im a living breathing bundle of contradiction. This site is mere entertainment to me. I make no claims to have deeper understanding of anything. I do however, have a Bachelor of Science degree in Environmental Resource Management. Do you?
We've been giving William such a hard time, haven't we? :)
Well if we try to do something about it, we at least have a hope of success. If we never try, then we fail by default. I don't know all of what we need to do to solve the problem, but I do believe that the first step to doing something about it is agreeing that there is a problem. Personally, I believe the scientists over the politicians.
Willsmith, your position on climate change probably some relevance, but if you feel like the demands of exponential population growth on finite natural resources comes with a some responsibility to save a few things for future generations (like say fossil fuels), whatever your response is probably similar to what most concerned climate change believers are doing about global warming.
Williamsmith
10-12-15, 8:44pm
Willsmith, your position on climate change probably some relevance, but if you feel like the demands of exponential population growth on finite natural resources comes with a some responsibility to save a few things for future generations (like say fossil fuels), whatever your response is probably similar to what most concerned climate change believers are doing about global warming.
Rogar,
You might have a valid point. I would have to point out that even though I believe there may well be a fuel replacement for fossil fuels, It is not clear to me how a species so directly dependent on a day to day basis both economically and logistically , can possibly make a transition smoothly.
Rogar,
You might have a valid point. I would have to point out that even though I believe there may well be a fuel replacement for fossil fuels, It is not clear to me how a species so directly dependent on a day to day basis both economically and logistically , can possibly make a transition smoothly.
I suspect you are right. The transition will not be smooth and will require some sort of crisis before any truly significant measures are taken. If you are counting on scientists to come up with a replacement for fossil fuels, you might keep in mind they come from the same general bunch who are saying climate change is real and probably related to human activity.
I'm not afraid to entertain ideas that are completely foreign to me so I have visited Bernies website and tried to wrap my mind around all the promises he makes there. Some of them boggle the mind and make one ask, How's he going to pay for that? 12 weeks of paid leave mandatory plus 3 more weeks for illness and family leave? A $15 minimum wage? Free college tuition? Expansion of Social Security? Just to name a few.....
i know now you can't find someone you totally agree with but there some topics that completely turn me off. Climate change, and civilian oversight of police departments to name two.
And there is the flip flopping around on gun control that's convinces me that Bernie has sold out to the Democratic Party. In Vermont, guns are a sacred cow so to speak. He voted against the Brady Act and he voted to block lawsuits against gun manufacturers. He's a dang NRA poster child in the past. But NOW......he's talking like every other Democrat following the party line. They have told him that he needs to follow he talking points on gun control if he wants to be a nominee. That's a sellout and that's one I can't overlook.
I like him and what he stands for.
Other countries who do many of these things don't have nearly as much money going into their military.
I just know we are not doing enough for the elderly, poor children, students, etc.
CNN democratic debate is tonight. This is a streaming site but it's not doing much for me, don't know if it's my connection or if this is a pay site.
http://go.cnn.com/?stream=cnn
I was having some trouble getting to the link until I turned off my flash blocker. CNN is supposed to be streaming the debate for free from what I've heard in other places.
Williamsmith
10-13-15, 6:01pm
I would like to tune in tonight but unfortunately I have a conflict. The MLB playoffs are on tonight. Priorities....you got to have priorities. But I really do hope Clinton flops. I have had a gut full of the Clinton and Bush dynasties.
rosarugosa
10-13-15, 6:18pm
I have a conflict too - sleep. It will probably be available online somewhere tomorrow.
Williamsmith
10-14-15, 7:20am
I have a conflict too - sleep. It will probably be available online somewhere tomorrow.
Well, I did happen to watch the entire debate, from start to finish. Just before the ending statements I went to the CNN Facebook website because they had a live poll going on as to who was winning the debate. I wanted to see how my impression was matching up with other viewers.
My impression was that Clinton was just doing what Clintons do, tread water, don't make any mistakes, bend the language to assuage obvious criticism about legitimate concerns, and pretty much hope ask for people to vote for you just because you are a woman. To me, she was the representative of the Democratic monied interests and a beltway insider. Really underwhelming.
Sanders was a junkyard dog. I thought he was easily winning the debate.
Webb was a tin soldier and wooden.
OMalley was cotton candy. Looked good but no substance.
Chafee was hardly notable. A brisk wind would have taken him off the stage and what's left of his lower lip he was sucking on all night .....does he have teeth in that mouth....not sure. He was grandpa jones. Exit stage right.
The CNN poll had Sanders winning 79% give or take.
Now Rosarugosa...to your point about reading online about it. The mainstream media has got their propaganda campaign in full gear this morning propping up Clinton, raving over her stellar performance and christening her the nominee. And they are trying burying Sanders as an alien without any hope of challenging the Republicans. The other three are just fodder to make Clinton look good.
Obvious to anyone who actually watched that Sanders has the ability to challenge Clinton but the problem is he's not backed by the oligarchy that runs this country and therefor, he's toast. I would take Sanders over Clinton and according to CNN live poll last night so would three quarters of other viewers. Problem is that don't fit their agenda , so they ignore it today and spread fiction.
freshstart
10-14-15, 8:57am
I realized in the middle of the night that the "ugh, I'm forgetting something," feeling I had last evening, was to tivo the debates. First Dem debates I've missed since high school. I hope they are online somewhere, I want to watch them before reading all the pundits' take on it. I cannot believe Bernie was at 77%! I'm afraid this is going to be another Howard Dean, Nader deal, I don't want to get my hopes up. I have given up the feeling of obligation I had felt to vote for a Dem woman. However, if the Donald gains traction or there is a serious GOP contender who could possibly beat her, I will vote party. If she's ahead by a long shot, I'll go Bernie. I want to send a message as well, but not if the race becomes neck and neck and doing so contributes to the Dem's defeat.
I am not remembering the details, but I did that thing Michael Moore suggested when Nader was up. NY was totally going Dem so you would trade a vote with a Nader voter in another state because it was a close race. So I could vote the way Nader without hurting the party and some guy in the mid-west voted party, instead of Nader. My memory is so full of holes today, I cannot remember who was the Dem contender! this is getting embarrassing.
if anyone finds the unadulterated debates online today, would you mind posting the link?
I cannot believe this slipped through my brain. Even on bedrest for a tough pregnancy, I got permission from my OB to go vote down Al D'Amato and for Hillary. Hey, I voted for her once, so yup, I really have no obligation to vote for her now just because she's a chick.
I kept thinking "these are the best candidates a major party can produce?". Hillary kept mashing down on the 'woman button', and putting in her bids to purchase the votes of various groups (I liked Webb's question about how they'd pay for all this stuff). Sanders seemed not so much a junkyard dog as my little girl's hamster running endlessly in the rhetorical class war wheel. If I was on Wall Street, I'd work hard to get this guy the Democratic nomination. I can't believe what he's selling would fly with the general public.
Neither Cooper or the candidates seemed to have much stomach for difficult questions or keeping answers on point.
I kept thinking "these are the best candidates a major party can produce?". I missed the debate, but after seeing a few clips this morning I can't help thinking the Democratic hopefuls are the oldest, whitest bunch of hipsters I've seen on one stage in a long time.
I missed the debate, but after seeing a few clips this morning I can't help thinking the Democratic hopefuls are the oldest, whitest bunch of hipsters I've seen on one stage in a long time.
I think part of their problem is a generation of losing ground at the state and local level. They aren't developing young talent in the minors that they can send up to the Big Show.
I think part of their problem is a generation of losing ground at the state and local level. They aren't developing young talent in the minors that they can send up to the Big Show.
Just goes to show that their message doesn't resonate on a local stage, although they do well enough on the national. I remain confused on how that works.
Just goes to show that their message doesn't resonate on a local stage, although they do well enough on the national. I remain confused on how that works.
I think it may partly be that, and partly the result of an ideological preference for big central government solutions over the messy quotidian grind of ground-level governance.
Williamsmith
10-14-15, 1:38pm
Frankly, I don't se any difference in the outcome whether Democrats or Republicans win. Seems like they are just big marionettes up there saying anything they think might play well for their constituents. None of them ever intend on making well off people pay for poor people to get a boost up. It's all a farce.
Sanders......now here is a guy that at least dishes out no shuck and jive. He says it like he thinks it is even if it is fantasy. Clintons people will either buy him off or convince him to exit the race with a little arm twisting. He just don't fit in. It would be interesting to have a four party system. Far left and left.....far right and right. Where the heck is the middle?
catherine
10-14-15, 2:04pm
I watched the whole thing, and I think Clinton was definitely the most polished (no surprise), and pundits are saying that she was surprisingly likable.
Bernie did fine, but I was hoping for a little more--yet I think his "damn e-mails" quote will go down as a classic (as well as Chafee's sorry 'come on guys, cut me a break, it was my first day on the Senate and my dad died!' excuse).
However, it seems Bernie did muster more troops, judging by the twitter activity and donations received after the debate.
rodeosweetheart
10-14-15, 2:10pm
Maybe it will be like Ross Perot all over again. . .
The difference between the Republicans winning and the Democrats winning lies in the selection of Supreme Court justices. Among other things.
I think the dems are "old" but the youth of America is behind Bernie, so maybe 20 years from now there will be more middle aged possibilities rising through the ranks. O'Malley was a surprise to me, he didn't do that badly. Webb should run as a republican, and Chaffee should go home. Between Bernie and Hilary ... we're gonna come down to a problem if Bernie gets the nomination because it's true, the right-of-center America will flatten him.
What I would like is for the media to stop giving Joe Biden free press time, the guy didn't even show up. Bye Bye Biden, thank you for eight years of invisibility, enjoy your pension.
rodeosweetheart
10-14-15, 2:43pm
Wow, just read this on Twitter:
Jon Stein @RiotJonStein 42m42 minutes ago
Last night, @CNN had a poll asking who won the debate. The results had @BernieSanders in a staggering lead. This morning they deleted it.
ApatheticNoMore
10-14-15, 2:43pm
The difference between the Republicans winning and the Democrats winning lies in the selection of Supreme Court justices.
The Supreme Court justices seem to be corporatists no matter which party nominates them (with very rare probably non-repeatable exceptions). That's more of an issue to me than most other things they rule on. Corporate personhood dates way back.
Williamsmith
10-14-15, 2:45pm
The difference between the Republicans winning and the Democrats winning lies in the selection of Supreme Court justices. Among other things.
A valid point only because Congress has allowed the Presidency to become more than it was intended. Roosevelt once tried to use the Supreme Court to further his agenda by adding justices to the court. There is no current mandate for nine justices. It could be 11 or 13 for that matter or 7. But when Roosevelt tried to add sympathetic justices to the court, Congress blocked it because the court is supposed to be non political.
Williamsmith
10-14-15, 2:54pm
Wow, just read this on Twitter:
Jon Stein @RiotJonStein 42m42 minutes ago
Last night, @CNN had a poll asking who won the debate. The results had @BernieSanders in a staggering lead. This morning they deleted it.
as I said, I logged on to the live poll at about 10:50 pm est and Sanders was fluctuating in the high 77, 78 percent. Clinton was getting clobbered at around 10 per cent. That didn't set well with the media pundits who are paid by the Democrat machine and so by morning they had Clinton reinvented as the next best thing to sliced bread.
There is no doubt that Sanders scored big and will realize a fundraising boost over this, but the money is not coming from those in control who want to continue to meddle in the affairs of the Middle East countries because so much of their monied interests emanated from there. If Clinton is elected, foreign policy will remain the same or become worse. She will just piss off anybody who gets in her way. I look at her and see arrogance. I'm a Clinton....you dare to question me?
for God sake, she said it herself. she represented Wall Street!
The Clintons have always been creatures of Wall Street. Remember Hillary's uncanny luck in the market?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy
The Clintons have always been creatures of Wall Street. Remember Hillary's uncanny luck in the market?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_cattle_futures_controversy
She had the financial acumen to become extremely wealthy in the philanthropy business. Surely speculating in futures would be child's play.
I'm still a Bernie Sanders gal, but I have to say that I really appreciated the respect that the candidates showed for each other during the debate even though they didn't always agree on everything.
catherine
10-14-15, 6:07pm
Wow, just read this on Twitter:
Jon Stein @RiotJonStein 42m42 minutes ago
Last night, @CNN had a poll asking who won the debate. The results had @BernieSanders in a staggering lead. This morning they deleted it.
Wow, are you serious? Unbelievable. Well, they can't delete the $1.3M that came in last night for him.
It is really disturbing though, because even supportive voters aren't going to back a dark horse if they perceive (via our good friends CNN et al.) that he's already lost. If Clinton's camp can quash enough positive facts about Bernie's support, they'll probably take the nomination by attrition. ... or get people to be proud they're supporting Hillary instead of Joe Biden, who apparently isn't even running.
... I have had enough of people for this week.
Williamsmith
10-14-15, 8:36pm
There is a reason every candidate is a millionaire...billionaire. Except Bernie. Money talks. BS walks.
It is really disturbing though, because even supportive voters aren't going to back a dark horse if they perceive (via our good friends CNN et al.) that he's already lost. If Clinton's camp can quash enough positive facts about Bernie's support, they'll probably take the nomination by attrition. ... or get people to be proud they're supporting Hillary instead of Joe Biden, who apparently isn't even running.
... I have had enough of people for this week.
The reason the chattering classes give for discounting instant internet polls is that they aren't representative of the voting public. That they attract the most committed partisans, who vote multiple times American Idol style. I'm not sure, however, that the pre-primary season debates aren't specifically aimed at the most committed partisans.
There is a reason every candidate is a millionaire...billionaire. Except Bernie. Money talks. BS walks.
That's not true. The New York Times pointed to Marco Rubio's $4-500,000 net worth as evidence of his general lack of competence.
The reason the chattering classes give for discounting instant internet polls is that they aren't representative of the voting public. That they attract the most committed partisans, who vote multiple times American Idol style. I'm not sure, however, that the pre-primary season debates aren't specifically aimed at the most committed partisans. Perhaps, but the fact remains, they had a poll that would have worked in Bernie's favor, and they made it disappear when it didn't show a result they liked. There's a difference between "discounting" and prestidigitation. This should have been positive publicity for Sanders, regardless of whether it represented a true poll of the masses, and suddenly it's gone. Not appropriate, IMHO.
Perhaps, but the fact remains, they had a poll that would have worked in Bernie's favor, and they made it disappear when it didn't show a result they liked. There's a difference between "discounting" and prestidigitation. This should have been positive publicity for Sanders, regardless of whether it represented a true poll of the masses, and suddenly it's gone. Not appropriate, IMHO.
Also, if CNN was aware of the invalidity of internet polls, and cared, they wouldnt have put the poll up there in the first place.
Perhaps, but the fact remains, they had a poll that would have worked in Bernie's favor, and they made it disappear when it didn't show a result they liked. There's a difference between "discounting" and prestidigitation. This should have been positive publicity for Sanders, regardless of whether it represented a true poll of the masses, and suddenly it's gone. Not appropriate, IMHO.
The questions asked and time allotted made me believe CNN had something of a pro-Hillary bias more than the length of time they posted the poll results. It seemed the punditocracy made up their mind some time back. Apparently not screwing up in any major way was the benchmark for success of the evening.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.