The Next President is...

[lloyd christmas]

15 hours ago, bfargin said:

There are way too many variables, each with significant variance in climate change models, to come even close to showing a causal effect (even a "relative causal" effect).

I sat with a few scientists down in Antarctica while doing the Deep Freeze mission on days I wasn’t flying.  They were there studying the climate.  I asked them what the deal is with this whole climate change thing and listened for a while as they talked about it.  There were a couple big take aways.  First, was the amount of variables involved in their work.  They didn’t even have consistent climate measurements going back 50-100 years.  Where were the measurements taken?   When were they taken?   With what equipment?   By who?   How was the data stored and what data has been shared, etc.   Second, they all absolutely agreed that the climate is changing.  It always has.  They study the environment and climate to better understand it.  That doesn’t mean they were trying to validate future climate catastrophes.  They were simply trying to understand it without predetermined findings.  Lastly, they said it’s another example of something being used for political gain.  Everybody has an angle and everybody has a different set of goals and motivation.  

I believe the climate changes.  I don’t believe it’s something to be scared of. “Climate change” is a source of power and money.  Fear is a tactic.  It’s really no different than the 2 years of Covid shenanigans.  Gotta get people scared so we can spend endless piles of new money.  

Edited June 16, 2022 by lloyd christmas

[ecugringo]

33 minutes ago, lloyd christmas said:

I sat with a few scientists down in Antarctica while doing the Deep Freeze mission on days I wasn’t flying.  They were there studying the climate.  I asked them what the deal is with this whole climate change thing and listened for a while as they talked about it.  There were a couple big take aways.  First, was the amount of variables involved in their work.  They didn’t even have consistent climate measurements going back 50-100 years.  Where were the measurements taken?   When were they taken?   With what equipment?   By who?   How was the data stored and what data has been shared, etc.   Second, they all absolutely agreed that the climate is changing.  It always has.  They study the environment and climate to better understand it.  That doesn’t mean they were trying to validate future climate catastrophes.  They were simply trying to understand it without predetermined findings.  Lastly, they said it’s another example of something being used for political gain.  Everybody has an angle and everybody has a different set of goals and motivation.  

I believe the climate changes.  I don’t believe it’s something to be scared of. “Climate change” is a source of power and money.  Fear is a tactic.  It’s really no different than the 2 years of Covid shenanigans.  Gotta get people scared so we can spend endless piles of new money.  

I read something years ago stating durign the cold war, specifically when we had the DEW line we had more weather monitoring stations in the Arctic than we do now.  This helped shape the climate is cooling message.  

I also remember in the early 90's when the rain forest were being wipe out they would be gone within 20-30years?  That message eventually faded away.  There were even movies about it.

But with most of the global population increasing in 3rd world areas like Africa and south Asia.....they need cheap energy and land to feed themselves....but yeah go buy a Tesla and save the planet.  I think 1 car battery needs like a swimming pool of water to create.

 

Oh and the Dow is down 900 pts today.

[AC&W]

1 hour ago, lloyd christmas said:

First, was the amount of variables involved in their work.  They didn’t even have consistent climate measurements going back 50-100 years.  Where were the measurements taken?   When were they taken?   With what equipment?   By who?   How was the data stored and what data has been shared, etc.   Second, they all absolutely agreed that the climate is changing.  It always has.  They study the environment and climate to better understand it.  That doesn’t mean they were trying to validate future climate catastrophes.  They were simply trying to understand it without predetermined findings.  Lastly, they said it’s another example of something being used for political gain.  Everybody has an angle and everybody has a different set of goals and motivation.

Climate is not my area of expertise, but someone I trust puts a lot of effort towards climate study. This sums up some solid baseline assumptions.

[M2]

On 6/13/2022 at 9:58 PM, Prozac said:

Honestly don’t know all that much about DeSantis and running Florida certainly isn’t the same as running the country. I wouldn’t commit to making that call until I see his presidential platform IF he runs. I’m willing to listen with an open mind though. 

Based on that logic, how in the hell was Biden ever elected?

[M2]

21 hours ago, ecugringo said:

I also remember in the early 90's when the rain forest were being wipe out they would be gone within 20-30years?  That message eventually faded away.  There were even movies about it.

Don't forget in 2009 Al Gore--the hero of the DNC--"loosely" cited researchers and said there was a “75% chance” the polar ice could be gone during at least some summer months within five to seven years.   

Gore made similar statements about Arctic ice in his 2007 Nobel prize acceptance speech, and in 2008 a video of the opening of a German museum captured Gore saying that "the entire North polar ice cap may well be completely gone in five years." 

Of course, like every other false claim the Democrats have spouted over the years, they conveniently chose to ignore ever stating that!

[Blue]

Some recent rumblings about Biden being too old to run in 2024.  The cynic in me thinks that these stories aren't simply plain old journalism, rather they've been timed appropriately to "test the waters" and gauge the public's reaction.

From the NYT last week:

Should Biden Run in 2024? Democratic Whispers of ‘No’ Start to Rise.

In interviews, dozens of frustrated Democratic officials, members of Congress and voters expressed doubts about the president’s ability to rescue his reeling party and take the fight to Republicans.

Related article in The Atlantic from yesterday:

“It’s not the 82 that’s the problem. It’s the 86,” one swing voter said in a recent focus group, referring to the hypothetical age Biden would be at the end of that (very) hypothetical second term.

The Chicago Tribune is going so far as to speculate that IL Governor JB Pritzker's recent trip to New Hampshire is signaling a "soft launch" of his presidential campaign.  The guy has a net worth close to $4 billion, so would be interesting to see the impact of his money on the race.

[Prozac]

6 hours ago, M2 said:

Based on that logic, how in the hell was Biden ever elected?

Well, he campaigned for, and articulated his platform for the office. DeSantis has yet to even announce he is running, and I think it’s very likely he will be upstaged by the Donald and won’t run. When and if he does announce his campaign, I’ll make an evaluation then. How can I say I’d vote for him or not vote for him when I have no idea what his (currently nonexistent) presidential platform entails? 

[Prozac]

5 hours ago, M2 said:

Don't forget in 2009 Al Gore--the hero of the DNC--"loosely" cited researchers and said there was a “75% chance” the polar ice could be gone during at least some summer months within five to seven years.   

Gore made similar statements about Arctic ice in his 2007 Nobel prize acceptance speech, and in 2008 a video of the opening of a German museum captured Gore saying that "the entire North polar ice cap may well be completely gone in five years." 

Of course, like every other false claim the Democrats have spouted over the years, they conveniently chose to ignore ever stating that!

Yeah, but don’t forget: he was right about Manbearpig!

 

[ClearedHot]

$10 Trillion is net worth WIPED out.

8.6% "transitory" inflation.

$5+ National Average for a gallon of gas.

No mean tweets.

[Sim]

1 hour ago, BeerMan said:

you but I wouldn't want Trump as my SQ, GP, WG/CC,

And I would love for him to be POTUS again. So?

 

Edit - What about Bush, Clinton, Obama and Biden? Big fraking No! 

Edited June 18, 2022 by Sim

[Danger41]

I’d take W as a CC. Probably would have pretty wild roll calls and a good party atmosphere.

[M2]

4 hours ago, Prozac said:

Well, he campaigned for, and articulated his platform for the office. DeSantis has yet to even announce he is running, and I think it’s very likely he will be upstaged by the Donald and won’t run. When and if he does announce his campaign, I’ll make an evaluation then. How can I say I’d vote for him or not vote for him when I have no idea what his (currently nonexistent) presidential platform entails? 

Really?  Biden was hidden away during most of his campaign.  I don't remember him "articulating" anything, and would be surprised if he did as most days he's challenged to know where he is.  Go back and watch his performance during the debates.  If you really think that was "articulating," please explain how it is for the rest of us.

Sure, DeSantis hasn't started campaigning yet, it's a bit early but given how the Democrats are digging themselves deeper into a hole with their economic "plan" and other failed efforts, it won't take much to defeat them in 2024.  Honestly, after 18 months in office, tell me one "success" the Biden Administration has achieved.  Just one.  I'll wait.

Hopefully "The Donald" will be smart enough to stay under the radar this time and no longer divide the Republicans...

[Prozac]

1 hour ago, M2 said:

it won't take much to defeat them in 2024.

Careful counting your chickens before they roost. Lots of Dems were thinking the same thing in 2016. 

[Prozac]

1 hour ago, M2 said:

Hopefully "The Donald" will be smart enough to stay under the radar this time and no longer divide the Republicans...

On that we agree. I wouldn’t expect him to ever be “smart enough” do do anything other than put himself first though. 

[ClearedHot]

10 hours ago, BeerMan said:

CH I get it and I'm mostly with you but I wouldn't want Trump as my SQ, GP, WG/CC, etc. Leadership matters.

Concur...I don't like Trump and would not want him as a boss, I truly hope he doesn't run again.  That being said, was all of this damage worth it? 

[M2]

8 hours ago, Prozac said:

Careful counting your chickens before they roost. Lots of Dems were thinking the same thing in 2016. 

As did the Republicans in 2020, and while that election still has considerable stink associated with it, it's not worth arguing about anymore!

Conspiracy theories aside, I believe Trump was his own worst enemy far more so than Biden being a viable alternative, and time has proven me correct.  Had he stood on his accomplishments, and parked his ego in the corner for a while (yes, I realize that's an impossible task for him), he would/should have won re-election by a landslide. 

I still cannot fathom what anyone saw in Biden, he stayed out of view as much as possible during the run up and let Trump put a noose around his own neck (probably the best strategy he could have used). 

Personalities aside, there is no way anyone will convince me that Biden is a better president than Trump.  For all is faults, Trump did get the economy going in the right direction and put this country's best interests before others.  The current administration seems hell bent on sending it into the toilet!

[Blue]

57 minutes ago, M2 said:

Trump was his own worst enemy far more so than Biden being a viable alternative, and time has proven me correct.  Had he stood on his accomplishments, and parked his ego in the corner for a while (yes, I realize that's an impossible task for him), he would/should have won re-election by a landslide.

I saw the first Presidential Debate (Sept 29th, 2020) as a prime example of this.  Trump could have "parked his ego in the corner" and just let Biden run his mouth.  Biden has historically been a poor performer at debates, normally providing a steady stream of verbal gaffes.

Instead, Trump came in with both guns blazing, all all Biden had to do was sit back and watch the night implode.

Still shake my head at that whole debate.

[ViperMan]

7 hours ago, M2 said:

Conspiracy theories aside, I believe Trump was his own worst enemy far more so than Biden being a viable alternative, and time has proven me correct.  Had he stood on his accomplishments, and parked his ego in the corner for a while (yes, I realize that's an impossible task for him), he would/should have won re-election by a landslide. 

Bill Barr has quite a good take on the whole Trump phenomenon and the end of his presidency. I didn't know what a statesmen he was.

https://www.hoover.org/research/more-one-damn-thing-bill-barr

[ClearedHot]

Joe can't handle stairs or a bike but his finger is on the button.  Who is really running the country?

Damn stairs...

Stupid bike...

Those darn stairs again...

[BashiChuni]

embarrassing

[ClearedHot]

53 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

embarrassing

 

[dream big]

7 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Joe can't handle stairs or a bike but his finger is on the button.  Who is really running the country?

Damn stairs...

Stupid bike...

Those darn stairs again...

I’ve been asking the same damn question, it sure as hell isn’t Crackles. 
 

 

[arg]

[FUSEPLUG]

Remember when Trump couldn’t walk down a ramp at West Point?!  His twitter reply to the uproar is so ironic two years later…

Quote

The last thing I was going to do is 'fall' for the Fake News to have fun with.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/donald-trump-ramp-west-point-speech/index.html

[ecugringo]

All that money Germany invested in Green energy appears to be wasted.  Going back to coal!

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/20/ukraine-war-germany-turns-to-coal-as-russia-throttles-gas-supplies.html