Trump got more black vote, even after 4 years of lies and hate, than any Repub and somehow you spin this as if he is the racist. Sounds like you will struggle with the mirror test but good luck
Trump got more black vote, even after 4 years of lies and hate, than any Repub and somehow you spin this as if he is the racist. Sounds like you will struggle with the mirror test but good luck
agip wrote:
Lead or get out of the way, politicians.
Clearly industry is going to help get us out of the climate problem, and the GOP has to step aside and stop the 'Climate accords are stupid so don't even try' idiocy.
Green energy is coming, republicans. You can't stop it, although I know you have to be against it because the libs like it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/01/28/general-motors-electric/
subtext is that just this week Biden signalled a push to get all federal vehicles to be electric.
That kind of government support of new tech is key...it will guarantee demand so GM and others can take some risks to get the job done.
Biden is leading, in other words. Good.
agip wrote:
Lead or get out of the way, politicians.
Clearly industry is going to help get us out of the climate problem, and the GOP has to step aside and stop the 'Climate accords are stupid so don't even try' idiocy.
Green energy is coming, republicans. You can't stop it, although I know you have to be against it because the libs like it.
GOP didn't do anything to stop this. Climate accords are stupid BTW.
Fracking has helped us reduce carbon emissions. Democrats oppose it. Nuclear helps reduce carbon emissions... Democrats oppose it.
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Just because Trump was president does not mean he was the one dong the dividing.
No, his words were doing the dividing:
"Make no mistake, this leftwing cultural revolution is designed to overthrow the American Revolution,"
"The radical ideology attacking our country advances under the banner of social justice. But in truth, it would demolish both justice and society," Trump warned Friday. "It would transform justice into an instrument of division and vengeance and turn our free society into a place of repression, domination and exclusion. They want to silence us, but we will not be silenced."
"We are now in the process of defeating the radical left, the Marxists, the anarchists, the agitators, the looters, and people who in many instances have absolutely no clue what they are doing."
"Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on."
New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady took a stand Monday, distancing himself from President Trump’s recent attacks on National Football League players who kneel during the national anthem to protest police brutality. “I certainly disagree with what he said. I thought it was just divisive,” Brady said on radio show Kirk & Callahan.
Don'tReallyCare wrote:
Nuclear helps reduce carbon emissions... Democrats oppose it.
TBH I had not heard this. Seems to me that nuclear makes a fair amount of sense.
Do you happen to have a link handy for this? Not arguing, just wanting info.
trollism wrote:
Trump was averaging about 2600 stupid statements per week, therefore there was a lot to discuss.
Well played, sir/ma'am.
agip wrote:
Lead Foil Hat wrote:
Just because Trump was president does not mean he was the one dong the dividing.
wait is this guy trying to tell us that Trump was not racially divisive on purpose?????
Dumb is dumb, and we have to accept dumb people, but this is a new, catastrophic level of stupidity.
You can't be stupid enough to think the the Democrat establishment has not been sowing racial discord for years with intention to divide. You are correct, we have to accept that dumb people like yourself will fall for it. Dumb is dub correct?
Yeah, if you are racist, it's hard to support Democrats.
I see that.
kibitzer wrote:
Don'tReallyCare wrote:
Nuclear helps reduce carbon emissions... Democrats oppose it.
TBH I had not heard this. Seems to me that nuclear makes a fair amount of sense.
Do you happen to have a link handy for this? Not arguing, just wanting info.
The anonymous poster's statement is at odds with the facts. Here's a link to the 2020 Democratic Party platform document and the relevant excerpts:
Recognizing the urgent need to decarbonize the power sector, our technology-neutral approach is inclusive of all zero-carbon technologies, including hydroelectric power, geothermal, existing and advanced nuclear, and carbon capture and storage.
We will advance innovative technologies that create cost-effective pathways for industries to decarbonize, including carbon capture and sequestration that permanently stores greenhouse gases and advanced nuclear that eliminates waste associated with conventional nuclear technology, while ensuring environmental justice and other overburdened communities are protected from increases in cumulative pollution. All of these investments will create jobs for blue-collar workers, including in fenceline communities, help decarbonize American industries, and create valuable new exports to help mitigate climate change around the world.
https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/combating-the-climate-crisis-and-pursuing-environmental-justice/Nuclear power is a long time right-wing talking point. It's a pretty safe rationalization for not doing anything about climate change because it's unlikely that a large scale nuclear build out will ever actually happen. This is for multiple reasons.
1) Nobody, Democrats and Republicans alike really want a nuclear plant in their backyard
2) Nukes are not really economically competitive in an open subsidized market even ignoring startup expenses.
3) The upfront and liability costs are such that no private power company is ever going to take the risk of building one without enormous support from the government (which is a non-starter for Republicans).
4) From a technical/operational standpoint, nukes are hard to throttle quickly which makes them good for base load power and poor for servicing peaking demand. This makes then lousy complements for wind and solar.
Everybody that talks positively about large scale nuclear, including the D platform document above, is talking about experimental technologies that aren't presently ready for prime time. That's not to say they won't have a place in the future and the technologies aren't worth pursuing, but they aren't a real solution at present.
There was going to be a demonstration advanced nuclear plant coming out of Bill Gate's TerraPower initiative built in and largely financed by China, but it was (for the present) killed by Trump's trade war. This reflects point #3 from above, if the technology is to advance, it will require large scale investment that only governments are capable of funding.
https://www.engineering.com/story/bill-gates-nuclear-reactor-hits-a-roadblockMonkeys typing wrote:
kibitzer wrote:
TBH I had not heard this. Seems to me that nuclear makes a fair amount of sense.
Do you happen to have a link handy for this? Not arguing, just wanting info.
The anonymous poster's statement is at odds with the facts. Here's a link to the 2020 Democratic Party platform document and the relevant excerpts:
Interesting. Looks like Democrats added it to their platform in 2020, finally.
The original green movement started out in opposition to nuclear so there's still lots of old geezer Democrats like Bernie and Elizabeth Warren who oppose it.
Why don't we just commit $200 billion a year to fusion research?
The physics is there. The application is not.
If you can get large scale fusion operating you will literally send humanity into a cheap (and clean!) energy golden age not seen since the industrial revolution, or something like that.
Stupid idea but the payoff would be completely transformative.
Harambe wrote:
Why don't we just commit $200 billion a year to fusion research?
The physics is there. The application is not.
If you can get large scale fusion operating you will literally send humanity into a cheap (and clean!) energy golden age not seen since the industrial revolution, or something like that.
Stupid idea but the payoff would be completely transformative.
"The physics is there" captures the essential issue, the physics might work in theory, but there's been no engineering implementation that yields net power out. Large scale investment doesn't help all that much if you don't yet know what it is you want to build. That's not to dismiss the potential of the technology, but the timescale isn't there.
Harambe wrote:
Why don't we just commit $200 billion a year to fusion research?
The physics is there. The application is not.
If you can get large scale fusion operating you will literally send humanity into a cheap (and clean!) energy golden age not seen since the industrial revolution, or something like that.
Stupid idea but the payoff would be completely transformative.
You can't just throw money at a problem and hope that solves it. But on that subject, the ITER will probably cost about $200 billion by 2025
there is a god
jordan as a senator would be a flippin mess.
On the other hand, you could probably fool Jordan, Kennedy and Tuberville into locking themselves in the bathroom for 2 years.
OK fusion won't be here in time to save us from climate change, sure sure.
No other technology offers the hypothetical promise of 100x-ing humanity's energy availability. It would change the trajectory of human civilization.
Maybe the basic science needs to meander along for a few more decades before it's worth throwing real money at the problem. I really don't know.
200 billion over like 30+ years for ITER is cheap in the long run.
Also: Throwing money at a problem is all research funding is!! Maybe 200 billion wouldn't find immediate prototype reactors but could fund more basic research.
Kinda a pointless discussion as renewables are going to solve a lot of energy problems in the next few decades, but you have to dream bigger :)
agip wrote:
there is a god
jordan as a senator would be a flippin mess.
On the other hand, you could probably fool Jordan, Kennedy and Tuberville into locking themselves in the bathroom for 2 years.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/republican-rep-jim-jordan-of-ohio-will-not-run-for-senate-in-2022.html
So the lying POS is going to run instead for the House of Representatives again or for Governor. People like him are the problem.
agip wrote:
agip wrote:
Lead or get out of the way, politicians.
Clearly industry is going to help get us out of the climate problem, and the GOP has to step aside and stop the 'Climate accords are stupid so don't even try' idiocy.
Green energy is coming, republicans. You can't stop it, although I know you have to be against it because the libs like it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2021/01/28/general-motors-electric/subtext is that just this week Biden signalled a push to get all federal vehicles to be electric.
That kind of government support of new tech is key...it will guarantee demand so GM and others can take some risks to get the job done.
Biden is leading, in other words. Good.
Wow, big surprise, Biden subsidizes Chinese-made cars, that use Chinese-made lithium batteries sourced from Africa using child-slave labor. How woke!
Paradoxical wrote:
Wow, big surprise, Biden subsidizes Chinese-made cars, that use Chinese-made lithium batteries sourced from Africa using child-slave labor. How woke!
You are my vote for poster of the year so far. Averaging like 20 whiny triggered posts a day. It's good comedy.
seattle prattle wrote:
agip wrote:
there is a god
jordan as a senator would be a flippin mess.
On the other hand, you could probably fool Jordan, Kennedy and Tuberville into locking themselves in the bathroom for 2 years.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/republican-rep-jim-jordan-of-ohio-will-not-run-for-senate-in-2022.htmlSo the lying POS is going to run instead for the House of Representatives again or for Governor. People like him are the problem.
No - the POS is Joe Biden. Joe had whined about Donald Trump acting like a dictator when Trump was signing executive orders in his first days of office. He wanted "consensus" on most of the major issues and didn't want an autocrat like Trump doing unilateral executive orders.
Fast forward 4 years. Biden has issued 33 Executive Orders which is TRIPLE the amount the COMBINED trio of Bush 43, Obama and Trump did in their first week of office. He is not a hypocrite because he has no idea what he is signing. You Dems are beyond pathetic for supporting this clown. He was walking past troops the other day and was told in his ear to salute the troops. Instead of saluting the troops he spoke "salute the troops." This guys is operating at 10%.
Paradoxical wrote:
agip wrote:
subtext is that just this week Biden signalled a push to get all federal vehicles to be electric.
That kind of government support of new tech is key...it will guarantee demand so GM and others can take some risks to get the job done.
Biden is leading, in other words. Good.
Wow, big surprise, Biden subsidizes Chinese-made cars, that use Chinese-made lithium batteries sourced from Africa using child-slave labor. How woke!
President Joe Biden plans to replace the government’s fleet of cars and trucks with electric vehicles assembled in the U.S., he said Monday when signing a new “Buy America” executive order.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/25/biden-plans-to-replace-government-fleet-with-electric-vehicles.html