Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2016/03/15 16:40:33
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
It's, "we don't like this industry, so let's destroy it and prop up another. Nevermind if this is efficient or the impact on jobs".
So your counterargument is "I hate Democrats!"?
No. Re-read above please.
Did Ms. Clinton say those words, or are you putting words into her mouth?
Oh? Wanna play this?
HRC wrote:“I’m the only candidate which has a policy about to bring economic opportunity using clean renewable energy as the key into coal country, because we’re gonna put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business"
That sure sounds like she's going to use what means at her disposal as President to pick winners and losers.
So my previous statement stands.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2016/03/15 16:52:04
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ouze wrote: What's the gaffe, exactly? It's a statement of policy.
HRC said... wrote:Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right Tim?
But, yeah... feth their livelihood.
You must have heard that completely differently than I did.... What I heard her say was that she was gonna invest in, and get "Green Power" into "Coal Country" to basically replace the jobs that will be lost when she gets coal shut down.
Except that's not what will happen.
The people working in coal can't suddenly transition into Solar or Wind. The skills are not transferrable. Those people will lose their livelihood right now and they'll never get it back. The people who get jobs are those who have the skills necessary to run whatever this "green power" is, and even on pure numbers these green power jobs will be less than the coal jobs(because a big part of coal is the actual mining, which doesn't have an equivalent in solar, wind, etc...).
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
HRC wrote:“I’m the only candidate which has a policy about to bring economic opportunity using clean renewable energy as the key into coal country, because we’re gonna put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business"
That sure sounds like she's going to use what means at her disposal as President to pick winners and losers.
So my previous statement stands.
Coal needs to be the loser here. Not today, or tomorrow, but soon. And all those coal miners need to get new jobs in the clean energy sector. HRC says she "has a policy" to implement this. I hope she does.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
2016/03/15 16:55:09
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
HRC wrote:“I’m the only candidate which has a policy about to bring economic opportunity using clean renewable energy as the key into coal country, because we’re gonna put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business"
That sure sounds like she's going to use what means at her disposal as President to pick winners and losers.
So my previous statement stands.
Coal needs to be the loser here. Not today, or tomorrow, but soon. And all those coal miners need to get new jobs in the clean energy sector. HRC says she "has a policy" to implement this. I hope she does.
Coal is already losing as it is. There is zero need to push it faster and cause more people to lose their jobs.
The way to do it isn't to attack coal, its to subsidize things like Nuclear power to replace it over decades. Shrink coal at the same rate that the people currently working in it are retiring, so that the fewest possible people are impacted by the transition from a low skill labor force to a purely high skill one.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Ouze wrote: What's the gaffe, exactly? It's a statement of policy.
HRC said... wrote:Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right Tim?
But, yeah... feth their livelihood.
You must have heard that completely differently than I did.... What I heard her say was that she was gonna invest in, and get "Green Power" into "Coal Country" to basically replace the jobs that will be lost when she gets coal shut down.
Except that's not what will happen.
The people working in coal can't suddenly transition into Solar or Wind. The skills are not transferrable. Those people will lose their livelihood right now and they'll never get it back. The people who get jobs are those who have the skills necessary to run whatever this "green power" is, and even on pure numbers these green power jobs will be less than the coal jobs(because a big part of coal is the actual mining, which doesn't have an equivalent in solar, wind, etc...).
Capitalism is a game of winners and losers. If you can't adapt to new industry then capitalism will leave you by the roadside. Thems the breaks to a harsh economic system. I am to understand America supposedly favors inovation over stagnation but the reality rarely lives up to the ideal.
2016/03/15 17:05:20
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Ouze wrote: What's the gaffe, exactly? It's a statement of policy.
HRC said... wrote:Because we’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right Tim?
But, yeah... feth their livelihood.
You must have heard that completely differently than I did.... What I heard her say was that she was gonna invest in, and get "Green Power" into "Coal Country" to basically replace the jobs that will be lost when she gets coal shut down.
Except that's not what will happen.
The people working in coal can't suddenly transition into Solar or Wind. The skills are not transferrable. Those people will lose their livelihood right now and they'll never get it back. The people who get jobs are those who have the skills necessary to run whatever this "green power" is, and even on pure numbers these green power jobs will be less than the coal jobs(because a big part of coal is the actual mining, which doesn't have an equivalent in solar, wind, etc...).
Capitalism is a game of winners and losers. If you can't adapt to new industry then capitalism will leave you by the roadside. Thems the breaks to a harsh economic system. I am to understand America supposedly favors inovation over stagnation but the reality rarely lives up to the ideal.
That's my point. She's deluded if she thinks she can just replace those jobs overnight. No, she's going to prematurely drive thousands and thousands of people out of work to give maybe a few hundred jobs to entirely different people. Long term, those Coal jobs will disappear but if done over a long period you won't have the immediate large scale unemployment issues.
Yes, it was a gaff on her part. 100%
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Don’t Sleep On Illinois And Missouri — They Could Help Make Trump Unstoppable
March 15 has long looked like the most pivotal date on the GOP primary calendar. And although Florida and Ohio are hogging the spotlight because they are the sites of Marco Rubio and John Kasich’s “last stands,” don’t forget that two other states could help Donald Trump become essentially unstoppable in his quest for the nomination: Illinois and Missouri.
Sure, far more delegates were at stake on Super Tuesday (595) than will be awarded March 15 (367), but the Super Tuesday delegates were all awarded proportionally. By the Republican National Committee’s rules, March 15 is the kickoff of the high-stakes winner-take-all season. Of the five states voting Tuesday1 — Florida, Illinois, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio — only North Carolina will truly award its delegates on a proportional basis, making it the least valuable prize of the night.
Florida and Ohio are hyped up not only because of their favorite sons (for good reason), but also because they are the only “true” winner-take-all states: The Florida winner will claim 99 delegates, and the Ohio winner will claim 66 — no ifs, ands or buts. However, Illinois and Missouri could functionally become winner-take-all too. Both states award their delegates on a congressional-district level. So if Trump (or someone else) sweeps their congressional districts, that candidate will win all the delegates. Together, Missouri and Illinois will award 121 delegates — which would go a long way in helping Trump stay “on track” for the nomination even if he loses either Florida or Ohio.
And so Illinois and Missouri are a big part of the reason Tuesday is such a huge fork in the road. If Trump sweeps Florida, Illinois, Missouri and Ohio, he will have at least 748 delegates and would need to win only 44 percent of all remaining delegates,2 a remarkably low bar, potentially ending the nomination fight.
If Trump loses Ohio but still wins Florida and sweeps Illinois and Missouri, he would need to win 50 percent of all other remaining delegates, a slightly higher bar but still very doable — and he would probably still be “on pace” for the nomination according to our delegate targets. But if Trump were to lose both Ohio and Florida, along with, let’s say, half of Illinois’s and Missouri’s districts, he could find himself needing to win 63 percent of remaining delegates to clinch the nomination, a much less plausible goal, considerably raising the odds of a contested convention in Cleveland.
Which of those scenarios is most likely? There haven’t been any polls of Missouri since August, but considering the state’s relatively large share of evangelicals (36 percent of the population), it would seem that Ted Cruz would be Trump’s main threat in the Show-Me State. But, unlike the last three states Cruz has won (Kansas, Maine and Idaho), Missouri has an open primary — the type of contest Trump has dominated thus far. In fact, Illinois and Missouri are among the relatively few states remaining to vote where the rules permit non-Republicans to vote in the party primary.
Technically, Illinois holds a “loophole” primary in which district-level delegates will be elected directly on the ballot. But unlike in the loophole primary in Pennsylvania, delegates’ presidential preferences are stated on the ballot, making it highly likely that the preferred presidential candidate will win all three delegates at stake in a given congressional district. The only recent poll taken in Illinois, a Chicago Tribune survey from the first week of March, showed Trump leading with 32 percent, to 22 percent for Cruz, 21 percent for Rubio and 18 percent for Kasich. A double-digit lead raises the possibility that Trump could sweep most or all of the 18 congressional districts.
Trump currently holds 462 delegates, 43 percent of the 1,065 delegates that have been at stake so far. But up until now, just 5 percent of all GOP delegates (the 50 Trump won in South Carolina) have been awarded on a winner-take-all basis. From March 15 forward, a whopping 64 percent of delegates will be awarded on a winner-take-all basis (39 percent based on statewide winners plus 25 percent based on district-level winners). This means continued Trump pluralities would be more than sufficient to earn him a majority of the 2,472 delegates by June.
TL;DR: If Cruz wins IL and MO, while Trump wins OH and FL... we may truly be looking at a Contested Convention!
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2016/03/15 18:09:49
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
skyth wrote: It's no Gaffe. You may disagree with the policy but it is not a gaffe.
No, its definitely a Gaffe.
She made a very very poor choice of words, which by definition is a gaffe, in a way she's sort of revealed her true self. Hopefully it comes back and bites her.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/15 18:10:37
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Yes. I asked you a very simple question: "Did Ms. Clinton say those words, or are you putting words into her mouth?" It was a leading question, to be sure, but still a simple one.
skyth wrote: It's no Gaffe. You may disagree with the policy but it is not a gaffe.
No, its definitely a Gaffe.
She made a very very poor choice of words, which by definition is a gaffe, in a way she's sort of revealed her true self. Hopefully it comes back and bites her.
The thing with HRC is she is the least worst. I mean, she'll be "not-terrible" president at best, but she's still the best option (of a really bad bunch) America seems to be putting forwards.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
2016/03/15 18:19:25
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
skyth wrote: It's no Gaffe. You may disagree with the policy but it is not a gaffe.
No, its definitely a Gaffe.
She made a very very poor choice of words, which by definition is a gaffe, in a way she's sort of revealed her true self. Hopefully it comes back and bites her.
The thing with HRC is she is the least worst. I mean, she'll be "not-terrible" president at best, but she's still the best option (of a really bad bunch) America seems to be putting forwards.
Disagree. She's equally as bad. But for more insidious and less obvious reasons.
I'd take Bernie over her for several reasons. Namely he's too radical to do much damage to the country, he won't get much cooperation from his own party. Trump is in a similar position, he'll be limited by the system too much to do any real damage. Hillary has proven she will freely ignore the rules, and somehow get away with it all.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
The people working in coal can't suddenly transition into Solar or Wind. The skills are not transferrable.
Mechanical engineers, electrical engineers, industrial engineers, and the like suddenly lose their skills after working in coal?
No. But the miners do. And they far outnumber the engineers. A miner is going to be out of luck, if he still needs to work he's going to have to move out west or up into Canada to find similar positions where his skills will apply.
Further more the workings of a coal power plant are going to have many differences with wind and solar, so there isn't going to be a clean transfer of the mechanical skills.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/15 18:24:35
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
I thought it was the Republican Mantra that if you lose your job it's your own fault. If you can't find a job because your skills are obsolete, it's your own fault.
2016/03/15 18:30:11
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
skyth wrote: I thought it was the Republican Mantra that if you lose your job it's your own fault. If you can't find a job because your skills are obsolete, it's your own fault.
When it happens as a result of natural market shift yes. Not when its artificially and forcefully induced over a small period of time.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
skyth wrote: I thought it was the Republican Mantra that if you lose your job it's your own fault. If you can't find a job because your skills are obsolete, it's your own fault.
You'd thought wrong.
EDIT: ninja'ed by GT
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/15 18:30:37
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2016/03/15 18:31:10
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
Grey Templar wrote: The way to do it isn't to attack coal, its to subsidize things like Nuclear power to replace it over decades. Shrink coal at the same rate that the people currently working in it are retiring, so that the fewest possible people are impacted by the transition from a low skill labor force to a purely high skill one.
Oh man, do you guys remember every thread about the minimum wage ever, where it's pointed out that higher wages will just lead to more automation and cost jobs, and how people were all concerned that these fast food guys would lose their jobs, and how we talked about how we need to slow the pace of automation so fast food workers can find jobs in other industries?
Oh, wait. That never happened. Instead, automated burger making machines are usually mentioned with barely disguised glee at the prospect of displacing the jobs of those uppity poors.
She made a very very poor choice of words, which by definition is a gaffe, in a way she's sort of revealed her true self. Hopefully it comes back and bites her.
Making a clear, unambiguous statement of policy is not a gaffe, even if it's bad or unpopular policy. She has said exactly what she meant without any hidden meaning. It may bite her, but not because she said something she didn't mean. I'm not sure how this is being spun as some sort of "this is going to blow the case wide open" misstatement.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/15 18:34:06
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2016/03/15 18:32:26
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
skyth wrote: I thought it was the Republican Mantra that if you lose your job it's your own fault. If you can't find a job because your skills are obsolete, it's your own fault.
Close, the exception is when you lose your job due to federal gov't regulating it into nonexistence.
The fast food jobs are actually an example, the Feds/States mandate a higher wage, those jobs get replaced by automation.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/15 18:34:25
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2016/03/15 18:32:35
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
skyth wrote: It's no Gaffe. You may disagree with the policy but it is not a gaffe.
No, its definitely a Gaffe.
She made a very very poor choice of words, which by definition is a gaffe, in a way she's sort of revealed her true self. Hopefully it comes back and bites her.
The thing with HRC is she is the least worst. I mean, she'll be "not-terrible" president at best, but she's still the best option (of a really bad bunch) America seems to be putting forwards.
Disagree. She's equally as bad. But for more insidious and less obvious reasons.
I'd take Bernie over her for several reasons. Namely he's too radical to do much damage to the country, he won't get much cooperation from his own party. Trump is in a similar position, he'll be limited by the system too much to do any real damage. Hillary has proven she will freely ignore the rules, and somehow get away with it all.
Perhaps you are right about her, but then I think everyone at that level of politics has to be that way. I don't think Sanders could take Trump in the general. President Trump would be nuts. I don't know how much of his talk is campaign BS and how much is stuff he actually believes, and frankly I don't want to find out. President Cruz would be worse, because he erally does believe all the nonsense he says.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
2016/03/15 18:35:47
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
A miner is going to be out of luck, if he still needs to work he's going to have to move out west or up into Canada to find similar positions where his skills will apply.
If he lacks marketable skills then retail or a McJob is his likely destination; something which is entirely his own fault.
Further more the workings of a coal power plant are going to have many differences with wind and solar, so there isn't going to be a clean transfer of the mechanical skills.
There is no such thing as a "clean transfer" from one job to another. This is why the ability to learn is so important.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/15 18:38:56
Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh.
2016/03/15 18:37:16
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
feeder wrote: I don't think Sanders could take Trump in the general.
The current weighted average of polls nationwide shows Sanders beating Trump by 10 points. Obviously there is a lifetime between now and November, and a bajillion unknown unknowns, but I personally feel fairly confident that, all things being equal, Sanders would be very competitive against Trump. Sanders has at least some crossover appeal - though not as much as Trump - but Trumps negatives are so very, very high that it would greatly drive Democratic voter turnout while somewhat depressing conservative GOP turnout.
That's my gut feeling.
CptJake wrote: The fast food jobs are actually an example, the Feds/States mandate a higher wage, those jobs get replaced by automation.
And never have I ever once on these forums seen concern trolling for those displaced fast food workers, the way suddenly some of you guys are pretending you give half a gak about 70k coal miners, despite the fact there are 3.5 million fast food workers so it would take far less automation to destroy significantly more jobs.
#alljobsmatter
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/03/15 18:40:41
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2016/03/15 18:40:02
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
feeder wrote: I don't think Sanders could take Trump in the general.
The current weighted average of polls nationwide shows Sanders beating Trump by 10 points. Obviously there is a lifetime between now and November, and a bajillion unknown unknowns, but I personally feel fairly confident that, all things being equal, Sanders would be very competitive against Trump. Sanders has at least some crossover appeal - though not as much as Trump - but Trumps negatives are so very, very high that it would greatly drive Democratic voter turnout while somewhat depressing conservative GOP turnout.
That's my gut feeling.
I actually agree with this...
Personality matters and Trump has a massive issue in this regard.
I'd think it'd be a Sander's Tsunami if his opponent were to be Trump.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2016/03/15 18:44:17
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: Personality matters and Trump has a massive issue in this regard.
I'd think it'd be a Sander's Tsunami if his opponent were to be Trump.
I think the closer fight would be Clinton vs Trump, because she has all the same problems as Trump does, but with some additional ones all of her own - she would substantially increase GOP turnout while. My gutsy feeling is that she would win, but man, it would be very close and I certainly would not put money on it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/03/15 18:45:05
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
2016/03/15 18:44:46
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
CptJake wrote: The fast food jobs are actually an example, the Feds/States mandate a higher wage, those jobs get replaced by automation.
And never have I ever once on these forums seen concern trolling for those displaced fast food workers, the way suddenly some of you guys are pretending you give half a gak about 70k coal miners, despite the fact there are 3.5 million fast food workers so it would take far less automation to destroy significantly more jobs.
#alljobsmatter
Ouze... it's more than just those jobs and you know it.
It's the *dick* move to wontonly introduce regulation/taxes as a vehicle to make industries like this Coal industry unprofitable so that their dearest green energy industries can fill in the void.
It's a dick move, like when Obama stated the Electricity Prices will necessarily have to rise in order to conform to cap&trade:
Hillary is signaling that she'll continue Obama's Energy policy.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2016/03/15 18:45:41
Subject: Re:The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
No. But the miners do. And they far outnumber the engineers.
Miners suddenly lose their skills after working in coal?
No. But the miners do. And they far outnumber the engineers.
A miner is going to be out of luck, if he still needs to work he's going to have to move out west or up into Canada to find similar positions where his skills will apply.
If he lacks marketable skills then retail or a McJob is his likely destination; something which is entirely his own fault.
Further more the workings of a coal power plant are going to have many differences with wind and solar, so there isn't going to be a clean transfer of the mechanical skills..
There is no such thing as a "clean transfer" from one job to another. This is why the ability to learn is so important.
You're being deliberately dense and obstinate.
Miners don't lose their skills, but you've suddenly shut down all the mining in the area. So they have nowhere to use their skills. They'll be forced to move somewhere else where there are mining jobs, except those jobs are already being done. So you end up with a glut of miners looking for work. Not to mention the economic hardships of actually moving, especially when that's going to mean moving across the continent to areas which have large amounts of mining.
Yes, ordinarily it would be the worker's fault/responsibility. Except this isn't the result of natural market movement. Its the result of direct government interference saying "you can't mine and burn coal to create electricity anymore". I assume you have the intelligence to see the difference.
If an industry is already declining there is no need to legislate its demise. It will go away naturally, and at a speed which won't result in lots of people being suddenly out of work. Newer generations will find employment in growing industries, the older generation will work in the shrinking industry and it will shrink at a similar rate to the rate of retirement. Ultimately effecting fewer people.
Though I suppose if Hillary causes all this unemployment she'll be able to crow about how much we need safety nets for all these displaced workers. While conveniently ignoring that she directly caused the unemployment.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2016/03/15 18:53:23
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
skyth wrote: I thought it was the Republican Mantra that if you lose your job it's your own fault. If you can't find a job because your skills are obsolete, it's your own fault.
When it happens as a result of natural market shift yes. Not when its artificially and forcefully induced over a small period of time.
Considering that green power has been a long time coming along with the drive against polution-causing things...it seems like a lack of planning on the coal miners' part. This isn't a sudden, out of nowhere change. Where's the personal responsibility platform?
And government IS part of natural market shift. Same way as the government subsidises all sorts of industries (like the military industry or the coal industry. Funny how they are allowed to pollute without paying the full cost of cleaning it up)
2016/03/15 18:46:46
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
whembly wrote: Personality matters and Trump has a massive issue in this regard.
I'd think it'd be a Sander's Tsunami if his opponent were to be Trump.
I think the closer fight would be Clinton vs Trump, because she has all the same problems as Trump does, but with some additional ones all of her own - she would substantially increase GOP turnout. My gutsy feeling is that she would win, but man, it would be very close and I certainly would not put money on it.
I'd still say HRC pulls ahead easily as Trump is a walking turdbucket and epitomizes all the "bad characteristics" of the wealthy white man.
Romney couldn't overcome that... which is a shame as I believe he's actually a very good person. Trump? ugh.
Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!
2016/03/15 18:47:02
Subject: The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition
feeder wrote: I don't think Sanders could take Trump in the general.
The current weighted average of polls nationwide shows Sanders beating Trump by 10 points. Obviously there is a lifetime between now and November, and a bajillion unknown unknowns, but I personally feel fairly confident that, all things being equal, Sanders would be very competitive against Trump. Sanders has at least some crossover appeal - though not as much as Trump - but Trumps negatives are so very, very high that it would greatly drive Democratic voter turnout while somewhat depressing conservative GOP turnout.
That's my gut feeling.
I actually agree with this...
Personality matters and Trump has a massive issue in this regard.
I'd think it'd be a Sander's Tsunami if his opponent were to be Trump.
Well, you guys likely have a better feel for it than I, but I thought the spectre of "socialism" is such a big issue (especially outside of the progessive states) that Trump's racism and lack of coherent policy wouldn't matter. I hope I'm wrong, of course. President Bernie would be ideal.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
