Indymisanthrope
Well-Known Member
Nope, we don't confirm justices in presidential campaign years, REMEMBER MITCH?
Also: Wade vs. Row? C'mon man.
Last edited:
Political Discussion
- Thread starter David A.
- Start date
Also: Wade vs. Row? C'mon man.
We only do if it's in the Republicans favor.
And edited my post to correct that.
haydee
Member
These people have definitely held guns before. Many times. They've done at least ten of guns.
EDIT: That's exactly how I hold a champagne flute what the fuck
EDIT: That's exactly how I hold a champagne flute what the fuck
Last edited:
AnthonyI
Well-Known Member
These two literally made me laugh out loud yesterday, the look on her face..........
.......on a side note, as things seem to be heating up, I've blocked 3 of my "friends" on FB for 30 days, I feel so much better
sahomerrocks
Well-Known Member
And to be clear. You can hold an AR style gun that ejects to the right left handed so the casings won't constantly hit you. But not how this guy is holding it.
Also, not mentioned here yet, but Trump retweeted an image of this couple and cheered them on yesterday...
The day after he retweeted that video of the old man in the golf cart yelling "White Power".
The day after he retweeted that video of the old man in the golf cart yelling "White Power".
Fox reporter asks Biden about his cognitive ability - CNN Video
A Fox News reporter asked former Vice President Joe Biden about his cognitive ability, an attack that President Trump and his allies have seized on.
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
Nah I’m doing fine over here.
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
Fox reporter asks Biden about his cognitive ability - CNN Video
A Fox News reporter asked former Vice President Joe Biden about his cognitive ability, an attack that President Trump and his allies have seized on.www.cnn.com
He should have replied, “Because of all the covfefe he drinks that my cognitive ability is bigly.”
DownIsTheNewUp
Well-Known Member
I was raised to believe in the ability to change things from within the system, but I think I'm at a breaking point mentally.
We have a 10 year window to radically de-carbonize our infrastructure and economy or this planet likely borders on uninhabitable by mid-century. Meanwhile, we have the highest rates of economic inequality since the Great Depression and a pandemic that is about to become very expensive for millions of uninsured.
Colorado proved a progressive could win on a state wide level when they elected Polis, who (in spite of the portions of the economy that are energy dependent) and has shown its voters care about the environment and climate change more than perhaps any other.
And yet Colorado chose a guy who downplays the severity climate change at every turn, whose fracking policies have proven an environmental disaster and whose presidential campaign might as well have been titled "the 1% has feelings too". Oh and he is embroiled in an ethics scandal.
I know that the pandemic laid waste to Romanoff's strength as it pertains to grassroots organizing... but if Hickenlooper is the best that a state as progressive as Colorado can come up with wen the stakes are this high... the future is so fucked.
(And that's without even really touching Booker's loss and the fact that his city of 600,000 had only one polling location and a 6pm closing time-- and lost by 10k votes).
We have a 10 year window to radically de-carbonize our infrastructure and economy or this planet likely borders on uninhabitable by mid-century. Meanwhile, we have the highest rates of economic inequality since the Great Depression and a pandemic that is about to become very expensive for millions of uninsured.
Colorado proved a progressive could win on a state wide level when they elected Polis, who (in spite of the portions of the economy that are energy dependent) and has shown its voters care about the environment and climate change more than perhaps any other.
And yet Colorado chose a guy who downplays the severity climate change at every turn, whose fracking policies have proven an environmental disaster and whose presidential campaign might as well have been titled "the 1% has feelings too". Oh and he is embroiled in an ethics scandal.
I know that the pandemic laid waste to Romanoff's strength as it pertains to grassroots organizing... but if Hickenlooper is the best that a state as progressive as Colorado can come up with wen the stakes are this high... the future is so fucked.
(And that's without even really touching Booker's loss and the fact that his city of 600,000 had only one polling location and a 6pm closing time-- and lost by 10k votes).
jaycee
Well-Known Member
Can you explain where this "10 year window" thing comes from?
DownIsTheNewUp
Well-Known Member
We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN
Urgent changes needed to cut risk of extreme heat, drought, floods and poverty, says IPCC
www.theguardian.com
Report: we have just 12 years to limit devastating global warming
A UN panel of scientists says every bit of warming matters, and we’re almost out of time to keep it in check.
www.vox.com
And if anything, those 2018 estimates are proving too conservative. Last week it was 101 degrees in the arctic circle-a mark that was not supposed to be reached for awhile.
jaycee
Well-Known Member
We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN
Urgent changes needed to cut risk of extreme heat, drought, floods and poverty, says IPCC
Report: we have just 12 years to limit devastating global warming
A UN panel of scientists says every bit of warming matters, and we’re almost out of time to keep it in check.
And if anything, those 2018 estimates are proving too conservative. Last week it was 101 degrees in the arctic circle-a mark that was not supposed to be reached for awhile.
Without getting into the science and the differences between weather and climate there are major issues with interpreting 1.5 degrees C as the ending of the world or falling off some precipice that means more tragedy than was already expected. There is no doubt that the current human-induced global change is going to kill people. There is no-doubt that it already has. There is no doubt that temperatures will continue to rise even if we shut off the carbon faucet completely 10 years ago (not arguing that we shouldn't now) but the world is not ending if we don't either.
The temperature regime humans evolved in is over and we need to adapt. There is no going back and there is no stopping what has already been done (again that doesn't mean we shouldn't stop fossil fuel usage etc.) Atmospheric Carbon and its relationship to global temperatures, weather, ocean circulation is not a perfect 1 to 1 relationship, and a completely ice free earth is not necessarily uninhabitable. A lot of places where we now live would be, but it will still be a livable planet. That being said, the people that get to exist in that world whenever it happens (and that's much further than 10 years out) are the people who have enough privilege to do so. Those who can afford to do so. There will be climate refugees, not just in far off island nations, but here in the U.S. as well. The most vulnerable people will pay a much steeper price.
I just think the notion that the world is ending is a very dangerous way to put it because it suggests there is only one path forward. There isn't. Plus the scare tactic titles of those articles imply that global warming hasn't already been destructive - like there is some new evidence. It's getting warmer, we new this was going to happen. We knew it would be destructive 20 or 30 years ago and atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 440 or 450 ppm is not a surprise. The globe isn't going to decouple from fossil fuels or become carbon neutral in the next decade. The will doesn't exist and the technology doesn't exist. But through a combination of decoupling, innovation, and adaptation we will be able to exist.
We should all be concerned. We should all do our part and we should all be engaged in policies that help us to adapt and help our lives to become C-neutral, but there is no flipping a switch to shut it all down and scaring people about the future does more harm than good. Hope has to be a part of the equation if people are going to be motivated at the individual level to engage with threats that will outlive their great-grandchildren. Realism is necessary but so is hope.
DownIsTheNewUp
Well-Known Member
I have no doubt that the science behind it is imperfect. I agree that much damage has already been done, that people have already died and that there are many ways forward.
I also see the signs that the science above is more correct than not all over the place. Whether that's the acidification of the ocean (from 2015-18 I worked for a seafood company known for it's sustainable practices and the changes within the ocean in just that short span were jaw dropping), the food shortages, the rapidness with which the ice caps are melting and the arctic growing warmer or the very measurable death of bio-diversity even within the portions of the planet that are basically untouched by humans (I know somebody who works developing sonar technology that is measuring bio-diversity within the inner most portions of the rain forest and lets just say the results he is finding are not good).
It's not about flipping a switch either. It's about having enough people in office who treat climate change as an existential threat to begin exploring the possible paths forward. This is even more vital because we are both in agreement that there is no switch. Every single tactic / improvement / technological advancement matters. But so does expediency.
I do appreciate people letting me bring this here by the way. I don't want to post it on Facebook, but I'm full of dread at the moment as somebody who would really like to have kids in the near future.
You mean the people in office are not supposed to deny that global warming exists and dismiss the science all while rolling back as many regulations as possible and pulling out of international climate treaties? Who would have thought that.
Trump-backed five-term Republican lawmaker loses primary to challenger who praised QAnon conspiracy
A five-term Republican congressman endorsed by President Donald Trump conceded his primary reelection bid in Colorado's 3rd Congressional District on Tuesday evening, a stunning upset that will vault his far-right challenger, Lauren Boebert, into the state's general election.
A five-term Republican congressman from Colorado has lost the primary election against a far-right challenger.
This is scary if you think about it. Conservative areas are backing far-right policies further polarizing and deciding us as a country. In recent years there has been a push towards the far-right, not just cross the United States but also in other Countries.
Talk about waiting until the last minute to pass something. Late last night, hours before Paycheck Protection Program was set to expire they passed an extension of the program until August 8.
www.cnn.com
Senate passes extension of Paycheck Protection Program until August 8, hours ahead of deadline
The US Senate, just hours before the expiration of the small business loan Paycheck Protection Program, passed an extension of the program to August 8.
Just saw a Russia's not the problem, Joe Biden's the problem commercial paid for by Donald J Trump on the local morning news.
jaycee
Well-Known Member
My response wasn't about the science. I'm well aware of the observations and the links between a warming atmosphere, ocean acidification, sea level rise, storm intensity, etc. etc. etc.
Having people in office that accept the science is important, but maybe not as important as having people who actually have the capacity to understand and interpret science in office. Scientists and engineers tend to avoid politics professionally in part because their fields require them too. A lot of the 'solutions' that have been jumped to over the years don't make technical sense (see ethanol fuel or hybrid cars).
I'm not so sure that anything can change without addressing the motivations and drivers. What drives people to cut down the Borneo rainforest? What drives people to live an hour or more drive away from their jobs? Why do we buy potatoes in our grocery stores that could be grown where we live but come from an ocean away? Why do people vote for their perceived job security or taxes over addressing climate, infrastructure, and equity?
Your frustration is more than justified. I don't know how anyone who cares and thinks about this stuff couldn't be upset. I know I am and have been for so so long. This is a long game (unfortunately) and one of the things that's most difficult to do is to keep a glimmer of optimism with the energy of youth...to keep seeing the same things over and over again and maintain.., I know I've lost that optimism many times over the years. For whatever reason, all that has been happening recently is providing me some hope. I feel like I've seen some real change in the right direction among regular everyday folks for the first time in a long time.