ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 2020 elections , democratic party , presidential candidates

Reply
Old 22nd August 2019, 10:55 AM   #601
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,937
Originally Posted by ArchSas View Post
If you want to make the claim that gerrymandering, voter suppression, fake news, and the EC have made the American election process messy and somewhat undemocratic, I'm not going to disagree with that. The GOP does all they can to rig the system in their favor, and a lot of the time, it works (sometimes with outside help).

But that's not what you originally asked. You asked if "far-left" views were more popular than moderate ones, and that's what I was replying to. Evidence shows they actually are. Whether or not that's reflected in elections is a different matter, sadly.
You're right. I'll rephrase then: do you think that far-left candidates are more electable than moderates?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd August 2019, 11:27 AM   #602
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16,660
Well, we just lost our climate change president; Jay Inslee has dropped out, without (for now) endorsing one of his opponents.

Here's an article on the Andrew Yang boomlet. Apparently Yang drew 3% in a recent Fox News poll, and while that's not much, it put him in fifth position, as the only people ahead of him were Biden, Warren, Sanders and Harris. The article contains an absolutely hilarious (and actually endearing) bit:

Quote:
Now, here in the Suburban, as we crossed the Broad River, I brought up “Rex and Lex.” That’s what Yang named his pecs, “Rex” for the right, “Lex” for the left, when he was lifting all those weights. I knew about this because he wrote about in his other, earlier book, Smart People Should Build Things. He “could jostle them on command,” he had written, “to make them ‘talk.’” Obviously, I wanted to hear more.

Yang obliged. Having shed his blue sport coat, he looked down at his chest, and he … channeled “Rex.”

“He’s, like, almost mute,” he said, “but he’s still like”—and here the candidate for president made his dad-bod-dormant pectoralis undulate under his checked, collared shirt and assumed a diminutive, sing-song cadence—“‘Andrew, I still have a little bit of voice left. You haven’t fed me in a long time. You used to looooove meeeeeee.’”
Bernie Sanders has released his own Green New Deal:

Quote:
Dubbing the plan as his version of the Green New Deal, Sanders wants America’s electrical and transportation systems to be powered exclusively by renewable energy by 2030, and for America to be totally decarbonized by 2050. The plan calls for a $16.3 trillion public investment to make this happen, which Sanders says will pay for itself in only 15 years, partially through tax revenue generated from the 20 million new jobs the plan would create. To help kick the plan into gear, Sanders would take executive action to declare the climate crisis a national emergency.
But, no surprise, no nukes:

Quote:
The thing is, Sanders won’t make this easy. The plan explicitly says it will not rely on nuclear power, a move that will resonate with activists but could also wreak havoc on the electrical grid. Nuclear provides a baseline type of energy because it can, if needed, always be on.

“Does that mean that all existing nuclear plants that are still running in 2030 would be shut down?” Costa Samaras, the director of Carnegie Mellon’s Center for Engineering and Resilience for Climate Adaptation, told Earther. “That seems like an unnecessary fight and expense at a time where every bit of carbon reduction counts.”
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd August 2019, 11:31 AM   #603
ArchSas
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 145
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
You're right. I'll rephrase then: do you think that far-left candidates are more electable than moderates?
Considering the kind of support Sanders has been building up, yes. I'm of the opinion that a candidate people are excited about and will be motivated to vote for (because most people support their policies) is a better choice strategy-wise than appealing to some "common sense" notion of the center. Trump was able to build up that excitement when the Democrats couldn't, and it's part of what got him elected, even despite losing the popular vote and with low turnout overall. It's strange to me (although understandable, considering the influence of big money) that in mainstream politics supporting policies most people actually want is seen as bad strategy.

But hey, again, that's just my opinion. I just have a hard time seeing how a old conservative that no one is excited about (not even his own wife), and with a lot of baggage, is a good idea to run for president. Especially considering that a lot of criticism I saw among people I knew of Hillary last time was contempt at the idea that people should vote for her because it was "her turn." I think good ideas are far more attractive to most people than playing it safe.

ETA: Thanks for the link, kellyb.

Last edited by ArchSas; 22nd August 2019 at 11:41 AM.
ArchSas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd August 2019, 11:40 AM   #604
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,266
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
You're right. I'll rephrase then: do you think that far-left candidates are more electable than moderates?
Seems like they're about even overall, when you look at the polling.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...ident-general/

Sanders and Warren are "more electable" than any of the moderates besides Biden, and it would stand to reason that whichever democrat wins the nomination will become "more electable" than they are right now.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:22 AM   #605
BrooklynBaby
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 867
Bernie told MSNBC that to combat "climate change" it would be necessary to nationalize all energy production. So, only socialism or communism can save us from the climate change hoax.
BrooklynBaby is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:35 AM   #606
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,266
Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
Bernie told MSNBC that to combat "climate change" it would be necessary to nationalize all energy production. So, only socialism or communism can save us from the climate change hoax.
Sounds like BS.
Got a link?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:46 AM   #607
BrooklynBaby
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 867
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Sounds like BS.
Got a link?
BS? You could see this coming from Bernie and AOC all along. This is what "climate change" has always been about.


https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019...und-the-edges/
BrooklynBaby is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:57 AM   #608
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,932
Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
Bernie told MSNBC that to combat "climate change" it would be necessary to nationalize all energy production. So, only socialism or communism can save us from the climate change hoax.
"Climate change" is for "sheeple". Or something like that.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:33 AM   #609
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,266
Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
BS? You could see this coming from Bernie and AOC all along. This is what "climate change" has always been about.


https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019...und-the-edges/
Can you quote the part where he says "nationalize all energy production"?

The closest I'm seeing is:
Quote:
Look, the TVA has done a lot of good work. It produces electricity from hydropower and other sources.
What we need to do is have an aggressive federal government saying that we are going to produce a massive amount of electricity from solar and from wind and from other sustainable energies and we will sell it out. And by the way, we’re going to make money doing that.

But you can’t nibble around the edges anymore. We need to transform our energy system. That means a massive increase in sustainable energy.
Do you think the Hoover Dam is communism?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; Yesterday at 10:37 AM.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 10:39 AM   #610
Armitage72
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 3,094
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Can you quote the part where he says "nationalize all energy production"?

The closest I'm seeing is:


Do you think the Hoover Dam is communism?

I found an article on CNN talking about how he called for the complete nationalization of energy production, banks, and most industry ... nearly 50 years ago. People never change, after all.
Armitage72 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:20 PM   #611
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 22,251
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Well, we just lost our climate change president; Jay Inslee has dropped out, without (for now) endorsing one of his opponents.
Just as well, going nowhere. And the last time he got a yen for higher office he quite Congress (as my rep) to run for gov, forcing the state to hold a special election for his unexpired term. At least I got a trivia quiz question out of it.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:32 PM   #612
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,107
Originally Posted by Armitage72 View Post
I found an article on CNN talking about how he called for the complete nationalization of energy production, banks, and most industry ... nearly 50 years ago. People never change, after all.


By that measure Trump is a pro-choice Democrat.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; Yesterday at 03:33 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:50 PM   #613
Jungle Jim
Graduate Poster
 
Jungle Jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,090
Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
Bernie told MSNBC that to combat "climate change" it would be necessary to nationalize all energy production. So, only socialism or communism can save us from the climate change hoax.
If climate change were a hoax, you might have a point. Since it is not, Bernie may be on to something.
Jungle Jim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 11:23 PM   #614
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,275
Originally Posted by Jungle Jim View Post
If climate change were a hoax, you might have a point. Since it is not, Bernie may be on to something.
That's if Bernie actually said that. Right Wing media is notoriously inaccurate when it comes to claims like that, though. Right Wing "news" consumers also have a much, much stronger issue with confirmation bias and blindly accepting fake news than centrist and left-wing media consumers. It's also worth noting that there's very little in the way of actual left-wing media, though, compared to right wing and centrist.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.

Last edited by Aridas; Yesterday at 11:25 PM.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 12:10 AM   #615
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16,660
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Can you quote the part where he says "nationalize all energy production"?

The closest I'm seeing is:


Do you think the Hoover Dam is communism?
I've read a few articles on this nationalize thing, and it's somewhat tendentious, but it does seem to be a logical endpoint, if you buy Bernie's fantasy of 100% renewable by 2030.

Quote:
What we need to do is have an aggressive federal government saying that we are going to produce a massive amount of energy from solar and from wind and from other sustainable energies," Sanders said.

In his climate plan, Sanders praised the TVA but indicated that it and other federal, administrative bodies didn't cover enough of the United States.

"Currently, four federal Power Marketing Administrations [PMAs] and the Tennessee Valley Authority generate and transmit power to distribution utilities in 33 states," the plan read. "We will create one more PMA to cover the remaining states and territories and expand the existing PMAs to build more than enough wind, solar, energy storage and geothermal power plants."
The concept seems pretty obvious. Build more than enough power to replace all the old plants and the utility companies will be left in the position of selling the power to end users but not in generating their own (unless, one presumes, they have a lot of renewable energy of their own). Ergo the government takes a monopoly position on energy generation, effectively nationalizing that part of the industry.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 01:49 AM   #616
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,266
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
I've read a few articles on this nationalize thing, and it's somewhat tendentious, but it does seem to be a logical endpoint, if you buy Bernie's fantasy of 100% renewable by 2030.



The concept seems pretty obvious. Build more than enough power to replace all the old plants and the utility companies will be left in the position of selling the power to end users but not in generating their own (unless, one presumes, they have a lot of renewable energy of their own). Ergo the government takes a monopoly position on energy generation, effectively nationalizing that part of the industry.
Regarding the highlighted, there's nothing keeping them from doing that.

I'm pretty sure Germany's Energiewende, for example, has lots and lots of private sector ownership and involvement.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 03:55 AM   #617
Tero
Graduate Poster
 
Tero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North American prairie
Posts: 1,561
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Really? I would.
Vanilla>strawberry>chocolate

I will eat chocolate chip cookies, brownies, cake
I just don't care for it in ice cream
Tero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 10:18 AM   #618
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,275
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Regarding the highlighted, there's nothing keeping them from doing that.

I'm pretty sure Germany's Energiewende, for example, has lots and lots of private sector ownership and involvement.
It's also worth noting that there are a bunch of sustainable energy focused private power production companies, already, anyways. It's literally the fastest growing sector in power production, very much including in red states, despite the Trump Administration's hostility. Altering the subsidy balance alone would be enough to help speed the ongoing transition even more, before getting to the prospect of more active investment in sustainable energy.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:08 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.