What Does Everyone Think About the 2020 Presidential Candidates

[accountinquestion]

I never said anything about a "cycle" weather wise. Who in their right mind would say that climate locally or globally doesn't change?

Rob Singer did, then I responded and you responded. You seemed to agree with him, so why would I think otherwise?

I have not a clue what sort of asinine misdirecting argument you're even trying to make here.

[Rob.Singer]

The funny thing is, you guys can fall back on the cyclic argument to make yourselves feel better. If something is going up, it is just part of a cycle. If it is going down, thats just part of the cycle.

To this day, I've never met a climate change denier who does not have a heavy political bias.

I will tell you what has changed. Google "heat records broken" and you'll see how we're constantly breaking heat records. I had numerous hits that were literally less than an hour old. I didn't go cherry pick anything either. I hope you can see how breaking all time high records consistently is not part of a "cycle".

You didn't answer my question. A record hot or cold temp. is always being broken somewhere which is why they're called records. What's new about that?

The rate of the records being changed. Sorry it isn't obvious. I could go dig up some study but you'd say it was liberal propaganda or some shit. So just do a simple google search.. I guess they're all in on it. <eyeroll>

We've had records going back many many decades now. Records shouldn't be changing that often.

THey have been talking about global warming for decades now. Everything has been playing out like expected. This is not some random nature cycle. (it was renamed climate change simply because it is not consistenly warming up every spot on the Earth and that kept being coughed up at evidence.) It is global warming.

I don't see global warming as a political thing. Stupid people just can't get over their biases and see what is plainly obvious.

To say Trump is looking out for the future is a bit misleading. He's just pandering to fools and feeble-minded types.
Humankind and most organisms will pay the price when things start to get really out of whack. Right now it is just beginning to start. Of course, this issue will never help Trump become elected and thats what his narcissism craves. He wants to be a winner and not a loser like he sees you guys.

For every record someone like you would bring up, the other side could bring up 3 that disprove them. The weirdo liberals (and if you want proof of that, just compare the mature, attractive, intelligent, intellectual guests and hosts on Fox News to the collection of googly-eyed lunatic men, gross and ugly women, queers, blather-mouthed minorities, and unsure-of-themselves hosts on CNN and MSNBC who pretend to be "alarmed" over this make-believe "man-made crisis").

Libtards screw up just about everything they touch. And you people wonder why Trump wins so much, and why he has so many staunch supporters that drive dems crazy? Just look at the Special Counsel fiasco we went thru for several years, culminating in that pathetic display yesterday. The democrats even made a sham out of that--they couldn't even do THAT right. Mueller said he had no idea about the political beliefs of his team--that's not "how I chose them". I agree. But it wasn't him that chose them, it was his top dog Weiss-whatever--a Hillary lover and donor and Trump hater--who assembled only all clones of himself in an attempt to follow thru on that "insurance policy" Stzrok and Page said they wanted. BUT EVEN THEY WEREN'T CAPABLE OF BRINGING THIS GREAT PRESIDENT DOWN!

Hopefully Barr looks into this "team" too as he continues to get to the corrupt bottom of the Democrat-fueled Russian interference frenzy. They will all eventually pay. And it was entirely all orchestrated by dirty Obama.

[tableplay]

Weather is "cyclical" obviously. Yea, we have something called seasons and so forth. That doesn't mean everything is cyclical. Stupid logic fallacy. You can look at the graphs and look at the amount of literature from past 20-30 years telling us what was going to happen is happening. I really wish I was wrong.

You really truly are a stupid man. Micky I can respect, his hustle, his posts. He's clever. You on the other hand...

What's happening that hasn't been happening right along?

The funny thing is, you guys can fall back on the cyclic argument to make yourselves feel better. If something is going up, it is just part of a cycle. If it is going down, thats just part of the cycle.

To this day, I've never met a climate change denier who does not have a heavy political bias.

I will tell you what has changed. Google "heat records broken" and you'll see how we're constantly breaking heat records. I had numerous hits that were literally less than an hour old. I didn't go cherry pick anything either. I hope you can see how breaking all time high records consistently is not part of a "cycle".

Even if climate change is caused by man in the near term, it will eventually get dwarfed out of existence when Atlas shrugs. Which is to say, when the earth gets to the meatier part of the Ice Age cycle, the earth will cool no matter what man has done (or not done).

[accountinquestion]

What's happening that hasn't been happening right along?

The funny thing is, you guys can fall back on the cyclic argument to make yourselves feel better. If something is going up, it is just part of a cycle. If it is going down, thats just part of the cycle.

To this day, I've never met a climate change denier who does not have a heavy political bias.

I will tell you what has changed. Google "heat records broken" and you'll see how we're constantly breaking heat records. I had numerous hits that were literally less than an hour old. I didn't go cherry pick anything either. I hope you can see how breaking all time high records consistently is not part of a "cycle".

Even if climate change is caused by man in the near term, it will eventually get dwarfed out of existence when Atlas shrugs. Which is to say, when the earth gets to the meatier part of the Ice Age cycle, the earth will cool no matter what man has done (or not done).

https://www.latimes.com/environment/...ns-assumptions

These ice-ages you talk about were localized and not global. (Is that what you're talking about?) Not only that, the warming trend has been shown to be global and unlike any "cycle" we've ever seen. You guys need to get over your political biases. If you don't want to give a fuck, just don't give a fuck, but don't lie to yourselves with ridiculous denial.

I came across the link on FB. Made me think of you guys.

[mickeycrimm]

Mickey, you're completely wrong on this. There are entire fields of research devoted to social mobility. It's an established, well-researched science. The US is "inelastic," as they call it, compared to peer countries in terms of social mobility. The UK and Italy are worse than the US; almost everyone else -- Canada, Japan, Denmark, Spain, Germany, Australia, Finland, New Zealand -- are all better than the US.

When it comes to multi-generational mobility, measuring how many generations it takes for a family to reach average per capita, the US scores better, but it is still dead in the middle of the western world.

The US is actually poor compared to other western democracies when it comes to social mobility. And social mobility overall, in all western countries combined, has stalled since the 1990's. It's not improving.

That's some great socialist propaganda you got there, redietz. To bad I ain't buying it. What do you think the Yellow Vest's opinion of your supposition would be?

Not really a supposition, mickey. Certainly not MY supposition.

Do your own research, mickey. You have library access. You can either decide hundreds of researchers writing thousands of papers over decades know their subject matter better than you know the subject matter, or you can decide you know the subject matter better than they do. That's for you to decide. Nobody's asking you to buy anything. The question is, when you google the material or read the journals, are you going to be able to change your mind? I don't care if you do or you don't. I just pointed out, as a friend, that you're wrong about something. If you want to continue to believe that your personal gathering of anecdotal information and reading outweighs the hundreds of professional researchers, that's your decision. It's my job, as your friend and someone who respects you, to point out that you are wrong. If you prefer to think you're correct, so be it. I did my job.

I gave the same argument for years to Alan Mendelson. Either the math professionals knew their stuff, or he did. Two plus two and all that.

Here we go, for those wanting to dip a toe into the research. It's worth repeating that the UK does worse in social mobility than the US:

https://www.epi.org/publication/usa-...ries-mobility/

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...ed-since-1990s

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...mobility-index

My late wife had a doctorate in anthropology and a doctorate in demography. Demographers study this (among many other things) from a historical perspective and in the present.

As usual, I suggest nobody mistake me for an expert, in this case a social mobility expert. Dial up your local university and consult a professional sociologist or demographer if you want to learn about social mobility reality and myths. They can point you to better current readings and data.

Yep. Lots of upward mobility in countries that average just 1% growth per year. You betcha.

[mickeycrimm]

Trump is the hardest working President we've ever had. Wise up.

[mickeycrimm]

The funny thing is, you guys can fall back on the cyclic argument to make yourselves feel better. If something is going up, it is just part of a cycle. If it is going down, thats just part of the cycle.

To this day, I've never met a climate change denier who does not have a heavy political bias.

I will tell you what has changed. Google "heat records broken" and you'll see how we're constantly breaking heat records. I had numerous hits that were literally less than an hour old. I didn't go cherry pick anything either. I hope you can see how breaking all time high records consistently is not part of a "cycle".

Even if climate change is caused by man in the near term, it will eventually get dwarfed out of existence when Atlas shrugs. Which is to say, when the earth gets to the meatier part of the Ice Age cycle, the earth will cool no matter what man has done (or not done).

https://www.latimes.com/environment/...ns-assumptions

These ice-ages you talk about were localized and not global. (Is that what you're talking about?) Not only that, the warming trend has been shown to be global and unlike any "cycle" we've ever seen. You guys need to get over your political biases. If you don't want to give a fuck, just don't give a fuck, but don't lie to yourselves with ridiculous denial.

I came across the link on FB. Made me think of you guys.

You need to get over YOUR political biases.

[dannyj]

Even if climate change is caused by man in the near term, it will eventually get dwarfed out of existence when Atlas shrugs. Which is to say, when the earth gets to the meatier part of the Ice Age cycle, the earth will cool no matter what man has done (or not done).

https://www.latimes.com/environment/...ns-assumptions

These ice-ages you talk about were localized and not global. (Is that what you're talking about?) Not only that, the warming trend has been shown to be global and unlike any "cycle" we've ever seen. You guys need to get over your political biases. If you don't want to give a fuck, just don't give a fuck, but don't lie to yourselves with ridiculous denial.

I came across the link on FB. Made me think of you guys.

You need to get over YOUR political biases.

To paraphrase:

To this day, I've never met a climate change advocate who does not have a heavy political bias.

[Rob.Singer]

This is fun! In yet ANOTHER example of the wimpy liberals being completely infuriated, the Supreme Court scored a direct hit for Trump tonight by allowing funding for the wall from the Pentagon.

The queer-infested ACLU invested heavily in trying to thwart a completely reasonable presidential policy for this. I can't express how much satisfaction I'm experiencing over how many snowflakes will go home to their parent's basements tonight, smoke weed, and hope they can discover some type of weirdo-laced reasoning for why nature just isn't on their sissified side.

Does it get any better than this??

[accountinquestion]

https://www.latimes.com/environment/...ns-assumptions

These ice-ages you talk about were localized and not global. (Is that what you're talking about?) Not only that, the warming trend has been shown to be global and unlike any "cycle" we've ever seen. You guys need to get over your political biases. If you don't want to give a fuck, just don't give a fuck, but don't lie to yourselves with ridiculous denial.

I came across the link on FB. Made me think of you guys.

You need to get over YOUR political biases.

To paraphrase:

To this day, I've never met a climate change advocate who does not have a heavy political bias.

Non-sense. Go to places where it is actually starting to impact people. There is no advocacy here, there is just accepted scientific consensus.

You guys just believe what you want to believe, it is clearly obvious. I on the other hand would be happy to be shown something different. I've had this discussion countless times with wingnuts. Always bullshit yet they'll swear up and down it is some leftist conspiracy. Yea, across multiple decades, multiple countries, multiple disciplines. They're all fake scientists. Just like fake news. YEA THATS THE TICKET. <headslap>

I know the oil companies did a number on people for the past few decades, but the record is beyond clear.

BTW Mickey, those farmers are now getting paid more than before the tarriffs. Socialism at its finest.

Read some other news that just doesn't pander to what you want to hear, but it is obvious you don't want to be challenged. You want everyone and yourself to believe you're some kinda a moderate. That means you'd be open to logical thought etc. Clearly not the case.

Still a fan though !

[tableplay]

The funny thing is, you guys can fall back on the cyclic argument to make yourselves feel better. If something is going up, it is just part of a cycle. If it is going down, thats just part of the cycle.

To this day, I've never met a climate change denier who does not have a heavy political bias.

I will tell you what has changed. Google "heat records broken" and you'll see how we're constantly breaking heat records. I had numerous hits that were literally less than an hour old. I didn't go cherry pick anything either. I hope you can see how breaking all time high records consistently is not part of a "cycle".

Even if climate change is caused by man in the near term, it will eventually get dwarfed out of existence when Atlas shrugs. Which is to say, when the earth gets to the meatier part of the Ice Age cycle, the earth will cool no matter what man has done (or not done).

https://www.latimes.com/environment/...ns-assumptions

These ice-ages you talk about were localized and not global. (Is that what you're talking about?) Not only that, the warming trend has been shown to be global and unlike any "cycle" we've ever seen. You guys need to get over your political biases. If you don't want to give a fuck, just don't give a fuck, but don't lie to yourselves with ridiculous denial.

I came across the link on FB. Made me think of you guys.

I am referring to Eccentricity (http://www.indiana.edu/~geol105/imag...d-the-ice-ages) which is defined as the change in the degree of ellipticalness of the earths orbit around the sun. It greatly affects glaciation, is global and has a period of 100,000 years or so. I never denied anything about the climate one way or the other with regard to man's influence on it, but you like to use strawmen. I just wrote that in the longer term, these cycles will overcome man's influence if there has been one. Long term cycles will also affect climate to the warm side of the spectrum as well and would be similar to what happened during the Eocene era (very warm period in earth's climate history). Man may or may not be around when these heavier factors get involved in impacting the climate.

[accountinquestion]

Even if climate change is caused by man in the near term, it will eventually get dwarfed out of existence when Atlas shrugs. Which is to say, when the earth gets to the meatier part of the Ice Age cycle, the earth will cool no matter what man has done (or not done).

https://www.latimes.com/environment/...ns-assumptions

These ice-ages you talk about were localized and not global. (Is that what you're talking about?) Not only that, the warming trend has been shown to be global and unlike any "cycle" we've ever seen. You guys need to get over your political biases. If you don't want to give a fuck, just don't give a fuck, but don't lie to yourselves with ridiculous denial.

I came across the link on FB. Made me think of you guys.

I am referring to Eccentricity (http://www.indiana.edu/~geol105/imag...d-the-ice-ages) which is defined as the change in the degree of ellipticalness of the earths orbit around the sun. It greatly affects glaciation, is global and has a period of 100,000 years or so. I never denied anything about the climate one way or the other with regard to man's influence on it, but you like to use strawmen. I just wrote that in the longer term, these cycles will overcome man's influence if there has been one. Long term cycles will also affect climate to the warm side of the spectrum as well and would be similar to what happened during the Eocene era (very warm period in earth's climate history). Man may or may not be around when these heavier factors get involved in impacting the climate.

So something on a 100,000 year period is the important stuff, yet you tell me I like to use strawmen? okey dokey.

You are right though, you didn't deny man-made global warming. You found some other psychological trick to tell yourself you're on the right side of the debate.

I am not going to go study this, but common sense tells me you are wrong. Global warming will continue until we've basically burned up all the oil/gas we can pull out of the Earth. Then there are other sources of the greenhouse gasses. Not sure why you think that something that apparently has happened many times over the course of Earth based life will not be dwarved by what we're doing currently.

[tableplay]

https://www.latimes.com/environment/...ns-assumptions

These ice-ages you talk about were localized and not global. (Is that what you're talking about?) Not only that, the warming trend has been shown to be global and unlike any "cycle" we've ever seen. You guys need to get over your political biases. If you don't want to give a fuck, just don't give a fuck, but don't lie to yourselves with ridiculous denial.

I came across the link on FB. Made me think of you guys.

I am referring to Eccentricity (http://www.indiana.edu/~geol105/imag...d-the-ice-ages) which is defined as the change in the degree of ellipticalness of the earths orbit around the sun. It greatly affects glaciation, is global and has a period of 100,000 years or so. I never denied anything about the climate one way or the other with regard to man's influence on it, but you like to use strawmen. I just wrote that in the longer term, these cycles will overcome man's influence if there has been one. Long term cycles will also affect climate to the warm side of the spectrum as well and would be similar to what happened during the Eocene era (very warm period in earth's climate history). Man may or may not be around when these heavier factors get involved in impacting the climate.

So something on a 100,000 year period is the important stuff, yet you tell me I like to use strawmen? okey dokey.

You are right though, you didn't deny man-made global warming. You found some other psychological trick to tell yourself you're on the right side of the debate.

I am not going to go study this, but common sense tells me you are wrong. Global warming will continue until we've basically burned up all the oil/gas we can pull out of the Earth. Then there are other sources of the greenhouse gasses. Not sure why you think that something that apparently has happened many times over the course of Earth based life will not be dwarved by what we're doing currently.

The earth will cool into another Ice Age eventually - whether humans are on the planet or not.

[mickeycrimm]

You need to get over YOUR political biases.

To paraphrase:

To this day, I've never met a climate change advocate who does not have a heavy political bias.

Non-sense. Go to places where it is actually starting to impact people. There is no advocacy here, there is just accepted scientific consensus.

You guys just believe what you want to believe, it is clearly obvious. I on the other hand would be happy to be shown something different. I've had this discussion countless times with wingnuts. Always bullshit yet they'll swear up and down it is some leftist conspiracy. Yea, across multiple decades, multiple countries, multiple disciplines. They're all fake scientists. Just like fake news. YEA THATS THE TICKET. <headslap>

I know the oil companies did a number on people for the past few decades, but the record is beyond clear.

BTW Mickey, those farmers are now getting paid more than before the tarriffs. Socialism at its finest.

Read some other news that just doesn't pander to what you want to hear, but it is obvious you don't want to be challenged. You want everyone and yourself to believe you're some kinda a moderate. That means you'd be open to logical thought etc. Clearly not the case.

Still a fan though !

The projection in your post is blatant. You are the one calling la la land bullshit logical. BTW, the only thing missing from the Dem debate last night was the Cuban National Anthem. And a recent study determined the green new deal will cost each American 60K per year in perpetuity.

[Rob.Singer]

Should there be some congressional action on guns after this weekend's shootings in El Paso and Dayton? But first we need to make that moron Beto O'Dork disappear from public life.

I'm obviously a gun owner and I now have ten of them--all handguns. I'd never buy an assault rifle because nobody outside of law enforcement and the military needs one. I'd have no problem if they were outlawed and had to be turned in for buyback. I'd like to see a mandatory 10 year sentence for any normal citizen caught with one after the warning period is over.

And why is it OK for mental cases or online racial or any other type hate mongers to have the right to buy guns? What is wrong with better, more comprehensive universal background checks on guns sold anywhere? Yes I know the inner city punks and thugs will continue getting their weapons illegally. But keep in mind, most of those are used to kill each other. No crying over spilled milk there.

[MaxPen]

Should there be some congressional action on guns after this weekend's shootings in El Paso and Dayton? But first we need to make that moron Beto O'Dork disappear from public life.

I'm obviously a gun owner and I now have ten of them--all handguns. I'd never buy an assault rifle because nobody outside of law enforcement and the military needs one. I'd have no problem if they were outlawed and had to be turned in for buyback. I'd like to see a mandatory 10 year sentence for any normal citizen caught with one after the warning period is over.

And why is it OK for mental cases or online racial or any other type hate mongers to have the right to buy guns? What is wrong with better, more comprehensive universal background checks on guns sold anywhere? Yes I know the inner city punks and thugs will continue getting their weapons illegally. But keep in mind, most of those are used to kill each other. No crying over spilled milk there.

So your joining the ranks of the other useless eaters that are willing to undermine the very foundation this country was built on because a few people are dead at the hands of some whackos. Big deal 250 were killed this year in "mass shootings", most of which were gang disagreements by the way. Yet 35K were killed in car accidents, 750K lives were lost in abortions, and 100's of thousands were killed by doctors and hospitals. Hunting doesn't work out to well with a pistol. Assault rifles, full auto, are already very restricted and primarily reserved for use by the military and law enforcement.

[jbjb]

And why is it OK for mental cases or online racial or any other type hate mongers to have the right to buy guns?

Nobody has the right to buy anything. Any business can refuse you service. Just ask Zenking!

[mickeycrimm]

The latest Harvard/Harris poll is showing 63% of blacks and 61% of latinos are opposed to illegal immigration. This is understandable as the illegals pour into the poorer communities competing for jobs, causing lower wages, and housing, causing higher housing costs.

[accountinquestion]

Should there be some congressional action on guns after this weekend's shootings in El Paso and Dayton? But first we need to make that moron Beto O'Dork disappear from public life.

I'm obviously a gun owner and I now have ten of them--all handguns. I'd never buy an assault rifle because nobody outside of law enforcement and the military needs one. I'd have no problem if they were outlawed and had to be turned in for buyback. I'd like to see a mandatory 10 year sentence for any normal citizen caught with one after the warning period is over.

And why is it OK for mental cases or online racial or any other type hate mongers to have the right to buy guns? What is wrong with better, more comprehensive universal background checks on guns sold anywhere? Yes I know the inner city punks and thugs will continue getting their weapons illegally. But keep in mind, most of those are used to kill each other. No crying over spilled milk there.

Wow you are far more left than me.

So funny. I guess you really aren't really conservative at all, you just worship Trump? Because he is a "winner" and you see yourself as part of that team?

I in no way would ever wish government bureaucracy to have so much power. Lol mental health/belief checks to be passed to buy a gun. I've had rightwing friends who I thought I agreed with on a lot, but then I started to realize so many of them are more like you then what I expect out of conservatives.

[accountinquestion]

The latest Harvard/Harris poll is showing 63% of blacks and 61% of latinos are opposed to illegal immigration. This is understandable as the illegals pour into the poorer communities competing for jobs, causing lower wages, and housing, causing higher housing costs.

How fucking confused are you? Not that many people are blindly for illegal immigration. Mostly liberals just feel sorry for the people who are caught up in it and realize how hard they work and aren't bad people. They're also more fact driven. As a Trump supporter, I bet you have no clue that illegals commit fewer crimes than citizens? So deporting them doesn't seem like it'd lower the crime "rate", in fact it'd just raise it by simple math.

This poll says nothing and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone who actually tries to understand.

Most liberals are also smart enough to not want a stupid wall around the country for many many reasons I won't bother to enumerate.