2020 US Election (Part Two)

[Gorbles]

Obama, Bush, Clinton all contributed more percentage-wise to the debt than Trump has by the way. As for “Illusion of prosperity”: by most of the basic surface-level measures, (GDP growth, Job Market, unemployment, stock market) Trump’s economy had done excellently pre-covid and has been rebounding quicker than the economy did post-2008 under Obama since.

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...nomy-didnt-suddenly-get-strong-under-donald-/
https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_...rump-create-or-inherit-the-strong-economy.pdf

Happy reading!

 

[Zkribbler]

Obama, Bush, Clinton all contributed more percentage-wise to the debt than Trump has by the way. As for “Illusion of prosperity”: by most of the basic surface-level measures, (GDP growth, Job Market, unemployment, stock market) Trump’s economy had done excellently pre-covid and has been rebounding quicker than the economy did post-2008 under Obama since.

Errrr...Have you forgotten Clinton balanced the budget and the income of the middle class actually increased for the first time since 73?
Obama added more jobs in his last three years than Trump did before he crashed the market.

 

[Takhisis]

Happy reading!

Errrr...Have you forgotten

His ‘oh but percentage-wise’ should already have clued you two in to the fact that he's simply trying to spin it somehow because telling it straight up just makes him look like an idiot.

 

[Lexicus]

But his supporters keep portraying him as some magical politican who has only ever taken the right side of every issue, instead of moving with the times.

I will defend him as superior to Biden until all three of us are dead

 

[Takhisis]

I will defend him as superior to Biden until all three of us are dead

*cue Comrade Patine dropping in to tell you how you are wrong*

 

[Edmund Ironside]

The fossil record disagrees with you

To prove your point you will need to find a time when temperatures were higher then now, and supported a higher level of human life. Good luck with that! Otherwise your point that "A warmer wetter world might support more people," is utterly speculation.

Notice how the abrupt warming at 11.5kya coincides with Gobekli Tepe in S. Turkey

The flaw in your argument is that this is going from a cold climate to a temperate climate, rather than from a temperate climate to a hot one. Humans favor a narrow climate range, and we are already on the high end of it.

"humans thrive best within a narrow "climatic envelope" around the world. Most of the world's population live in areas with a mean annual temperature of between 11 and 15 degrees Celsius (51.8 to 59 degrees Fahrenheit). A smaller band of between 20 to 25 °C (68 to 77°F) encompasses areas in South Asia that are affected by the Indian monsoon -- the annual rains that irrigates large swathes of cropland vital for food production.
Surprisingly, the scientists said, humans have favored living in these conditions for the past 6,000 years -- that's despite recent technological advances such as air conditioning that have allowed us to push this boundary."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/05/world/global-warming-climate-niche-temperatures-intl-hnk/index.html

People will do what people have always done, move to a less hot climate or adapt.

Those who can will, those who can't will die presumably? Plus mass migrations historically speaking don't tend to be peaceful affairs. For example the end of Roman empire can be linked to climatic changes (in this case less stable and cooler conditions) which caused mass migration and crop failures. However if you look at the chart above, they weren't facing anything as rapidly changing as we are facing.

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/20...s-climate-change-disease-toppled-roman-empire

Regarding specifically climate change I leave you with the words of Sir David Attenborough (world renowned Naturalist & Broadcaster) "Right now, we are facing a man-made disaster of global scale. Our greatest threat in thousands of years. Climate Change."

Voters didn't know 9/11 was coming down or how Bush and Biden would respond and I dont know how many voters were convinced it was a lie in 2004, but it has since become common knowledge we were scammed into mass murder in our name.

Could it not be said Biden was caught out by the lie too which led to him supporting the Iraq War? Such as by a war mongering Republican president aided by dodgy intelligence from an ally (The British "sexed up reports"). Biden did later state he regretted supporting the war.

Why are you comparing a war we were lied into with alleged deaths from climate change?

Hell yes... but lets ask the people in countries Joe helped destroy

Okay lets discuss your indifference to all the lives being lost to climate change.

Which of these scenarios could save the most lives?

A. An opposition senator decides not to support the Iraq war (deaths from Iraq war estimates range from 151,000 violent deaths to 1,033,000). How many lives would have been saved?

B. The leader of the US provides clear and determined leadership when faced with a global pandemic (deaths from Covid 228,000 and still rising). He does not disband the pandemic task force, does not provide confusing health advise (?inject yourself with bleach), does not feud with state governors, does not downplay the danger of the virus despite knowing its dangers, does not feud with the scientists and health experts advising him (such as trying to discredit them), does not promote medications regardless of their actual benefits (see Hydroxychloroquine) and he does lead by example following recommended precautions for dealing with the pandemic such as social distancing and wearing a mask (rather then frequently doing the opposite). How many lives could have been saved?

C. The leader of the US takes a lead in combating climate change (deaths from Climate Change by 2050 estimated to rise to 6,500,000). He invests in sustainable energy, works to find ways to reduce carbon dioxide output (there are many). Maybe tariffs are placed on countries that continue to pollute heavily. He does not call climate change a hoax, he does not ignore reports proving it is happening, even those from his own administration, he does not pull out of the Paris accord, he does not promote fossil fuels, he does not pursue over 100 anti-environment policies and removal of regulations designed to protect the environment, he does not undermine the EPA, and he does not put a climate change deniers in charge of the EPA! How many lives could have been saved?
https://www.livescience.com/64535-climate-change-health-deaths.html
https://www.who.int/heli/risks/climate/climatechange/en/

By the way how do you feel about the fact that Trump vetoed a senate bill that Biden supported which wanted to end the US support for the humanitarian catastrophe that is the Saudi led war in Yemen? Doesn't really fit in with your narrative does it!
https://www.npr.org/2019/06/20/7344...-trump-senate-votes-to-block-saudi-arms-sales

My final question is more one of curiosity, are you against all wars, or just certain ones?

 

[Estebonrober]

@Sommerswerd
Trump has worse sexual allegations than Biden? He’s worse in some category he shares with H. Biden? In what way?

How did he mismanage the virus response? Economy was booming before the virus, and just this third quarter US GDP is almost fully recovered, growing 33.1%, fastest expansion ever since records began post-WWII.

What specific police misconduct are you speaking on, and what hand does Trump have in it?

I've got a bridge that looks real good in this market. Interested?

Also that 33.1% number is bollocks, its one of those numbers that comes up because the previous numbers were so utterly terrible. The collapse of the economy was the worst on record ever and the recovery is suspect at best (or sus as the kids say).

Trump has raped women personally, assaulted dozens personally, paid for them to have abortions personally, and lied about all of it while denigrating women in general. He literally has been accused of assaulting underage girls as well and has a history with well known teenage child trafficker Epstein. Police misconduct is rampant and constant, only a brainwashed American would believe otherwise. Trump is all too happy wo keep that corruption going so he can look "tough on crime".

 

[Estebonrober]

To prove your point you will need to find a time when temperatures were higher then now, and supported a higher level of human life. Good luck with that! Otherwise your point that "A warmer wetter world might support more people," is utterly speculation.



The flaw in your argument is that this is going from a cold climate to a temperate climate, rather than from a temperate climate to a hot one. Humans favor a narrow climate range, and we are already on the high end of it.

"humans thrive best within a narrow "climatic envelope" around the world. Most of the world's population live in areas with a mean annual temperature of between 11 and 15 degrees Celsius (51.8 to 59 degrees Fahrenheit). A smaller band of between 20 to 25 °C (68 to 77°F) encompasses areas in South Asia that are affected by the Indian monsoon -- the annual rains that irrigates large swathes of cropland vital for food production.
Surprisingly, the scientists said, humans have favored living in these conditions for the past 6,000 years -- that's despite recent technological advances such as air conditioning that have allowed us to push this boundary."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/05/world/global-warming-climate-niche-temperatures-intl-hnk/index.html

View attachment 573523



Those who can will, those who can't will die presumably? Plus mass migrations historically speaking don't tend to be peaceful affairs. For example the end of Roman empire can be linked to climatic changes (in this case less stable and cooler conditions) which caused mass migration and crop failures. However if you look at the chart above, they weren't facing anything as rapidly changing as we are facing.

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/20...s-climate-change-disease-toppled-roman-empire

Regarding specifically climate change I leave you with the words of Sir David Attenborough (world renowned Naturalist & Broadcaster) "Right now, we are facing a man-made disaster of global scale. Our greatest threat in thousands of years. Climate Change."



Could it not be said Biden was caught out by the lie too which led to him supporting the Iraq War? Such as by a war mongering Republican president aided by dodgy intelligence from an ally (The British "sexed up reports"). Biden did later state he regretted supporting the war.





Okay lets discuss your indifference to all the lives being lost to climate change.

Which of these scenarios could save the most lives?

A. An opposition senator decides not to support the Iraq war (deaths from Iraq war estimates range from 151,000 violent deaths to 1,033,000). How many lives would have been saved?

B. The leader of the US provides clear and determined leadership when faced with a global pandemic (deaths from Covid 228,000 and still rising). He does not disband the pandemic task force, does not provide confusing health advise (?inject yourself with bleach), does not feud with state governors, does not downplay the danger of the virus despite knowing its dangers, does not feud with the scientists and health experts advising him (such as trying to discredit them), does not promote medications regardless of their actual benefits (see Hydroxychloroquine) and he does lead by example following recommended precautions for dealing with the pandemic such as social distancing and wearing a mask (rather then frequently doing the opposite). How many lives could have been saved?

C. The leader of the US takes a lead in combating climate change (deaths from Climate Change by 2050 estimated to rise to 6,500,000). He invests in sustainable energy, works to find ways to reduce carbon dioxide output (there are many). Maybe tariffs are placed on countries that continue to pollute heavily. He does not call climate change a hoax, he does not ignore reports proving it is happening, even those from his own administration, he does not pull out of the Paris accord, he does not promote fossil fuels, he does not pursue over 100 anti-environment policies and removal of regulations designed to protect the environment, he does not undermine the EPA, and he does not put a climate change deniers in charge of the EPA! How many lives could have been saved?
https://www.livescience.com/64535-climate-change-health-deaths.html
https://www.who.int/heli/risks/climate/climatechange/en/

By the way how do you feel about the fact that Trump vetoed a senate bill that Biden supported which wanted to end the US support for the humanitarian catastrophe that is the Saudi led war in Yemen? Doesn't really fit in with your narrative does it!
https://www.npr.org/2019/06/20/7344...-trump-senate-votes-to-block-saudi-arms-sales

My final question is more one of curiosity, are you against all wars, or just certain ones?

ty for taking the time to respond to his abomination of a post on climate change. I've refuted this nonsense myself before (idk if it was berzerker at the time) and it is wearying smashing the same piles of bullfeathers over and over again. Mankind and its civilization exists in a balance and we should maintain that balance. Also fossil fuels are jsut ignorantly dirty source of energy and we should do better, lack of progress on that front is just stupid and lazy.

 

[Estebonrober]

https://www.politifact.com/factchec...nomy-didnt-suddenly-get-strong-under-donald-/
https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_...rump-create-or-inherit-the-strong-economy.pdf

Happy reading!

I'm pretty sure @El_Machinae had a post a while back showing that the trump tax cut basically paid like 200k for every job created and the majority of those jobs paid the workers less then 40k meaning it was almost all jsut pocketed by the very wealthy. Making the point that he way way over paid for that job creation . . . Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.

Also fact checking is censorship now . . .You are not allowed to hurt the GOP boys wittle feewings with wittle thingies like facts.

https://www.businessinsider.com/rep...m-of-censorship-2020-10?utm_source=reddit.com

• During a Senate hearing on Wednesday, Republican Sen. Mike Lee said fact-checking labels placed by social media companies are a form of censorship.

 

[El_Machinae]

It was that the deficit went up faster than household incomes, which means that every individual family would have been better off just receiving a check for the borrowed amount. The rest just shuttled up the wealth ladder

Trump already knew that tax cuts plus quantitative easing would cause wealth to migrate upwards, that's why he was asking for quantitative easing in April 2019.

 

[amadeus]

I'm pretty sure @El_Machinae had a post a while back showing that the trump tax cut basically paid like 200k for every job created and the majority of those jobs paid the workers less then 40k meaning it was almost all jsut pocketed by the very wealthy.

Is it fair to compare one-time costs with an annualized cost? $40k * 5 years = $200k. If those people are employed for more than 5 years under that model, it pays off.

Neither here nor there for me though because I wouldn’t be looking at cutting individual rates anyway.

 

[onejayhawk]

I've got a bridge that looks real good in this market. Interested? Also that 33.1% number is bollocks, its one of those numbers that comes up because the previous numbers were so utterly terrible. The collapse of the economy was the worst on record ever and the recovery is suspect at best (or sus as the kids say).

It's just the V shaped recession. Second quarter was down over 31%, so this is bouncing back, plus a bit. Basically, we are back to where we were last year this time. Give Trump his due, because he did predict it.

Trump has raped women personally, assaulted dozens personally, paid for them to have abortions personally, and lied about all of it while denigrating women in general. He literally has been accused of assaulting underage girls as well and has a history with well known teenage child trafficker Epstein. Police misconduct is rampant and constant, only a brainwashed American would believe otherwise. Trump is all too happy wo keep that corruption going so he can look "tough on crime".

Trump is no example for how to deal with women. If we didn't have so many similar occupants of the Oval Office, it would be a bad thing. As it is, the best you can say is that he's not as bad as Bill Clinton.

 

[Edmund Ironside]

@onejayhawk Out of interest are you still confident in a Trump landside or even a win?

Trump supporters get the watered down voter suppression experience of standing in a line for hours.

Which is the better analogy of being a Trump supporter. Being left out in the freezing cold after he has left, or the Lake Travis boat sinking where the richer Trump supporters boats sank the poorer ones?

It’s easy to see how the Biden cheerleading squad here would hate on Greens and actual progressives on the other side of the compass, not quite as clear why they are so upset with Trump?

Well as someone who has voted Green in the past, I can exclusively reveal that every Green supporter I know is upset with Trump! See my previous posts for why. But more importantly is this thread big enough for 2 Ironsides? I demand an Ironside off!

Trump has worse sexual allegations than Biden?

If we didn't have so many similar occupants of the Oval Office, it would be a bad thing. As it is, the best you can say is that he's not as bad as Bill Clinton.

26 women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct

https://www.businessinsider.com/women-accused-trump-sexual-misconduct-list-2017-12

How did he mismanage the virus response?

He does not disband the pandemic task force, does not provide confusing health advise (?inject yourself with bleach), does not feud with state governors, does not downplay the danger of the virus despite knowing its dangers, does not feud with the scientists and health experts advising him (such as trying to discredit them), does not promote medications regardless of their actual benefits (see Hydroxychloroquine) and he does lead by example following recommended precautions for dealing with the pandemic such as social distancing and wearing a mask (rather then frequently doing the opposite). How many lives could have been saved?

Sometimes it would be good to realize the forum isn't the US, and your tribal polemics usually don't mean crap to an international audience.

I think Drakle is Australian... But I might be wrong.

 

[Estebonrober]

It's just the V shaped recession. Second quarter was down over 31%, so this is bouncing back, plus a bit. Basically, we are back to where we were last year this time. Give Trump his due, because he did predict it.


Trump is no example for how to deal with women. If we didn't have so many similar occupants of the Oval Office, it would be a bad thing. As it is, the best you can say is that he's not as bad as Bill Clinton.

No we are not anywhere near where we were at this time last year. That is why I replied to the other talk radio zombie, is that is what I heard on fox news radio today myself. Its amazing amount of insanity that would drive one to believe such a statement.


The best I can say is he is at least as bad as Clinton and likely far worse.

 

[thecrazyscot]

Obama, Bush, Clinton all contributed more percentage-wise to the debt than Trump has by the way. As for “Illusion of prosperity”: by most of the basic surface-level measures, (GDP growth, Job Market, unemployment, stock market) Trump’s economy had done excellently pre-covid and has been rebounding quicker than the economy did post-2008 under Obama since.

Trump was very fortunate to inherit Obama's growing economy, just like he inherited his daddy's wealth.

He's managed them about them same.

 

[innonimatu]

Vietnam loves Trump. It's not like they care a single bit about who he is or what he's done in the US, but he's actively anti-Chinese and that's the best thing you can be in their book. The fact his practices called for the migration of capital from China to Vietnam is a cherry on top. So I can't agree with Russia of all places having the highest opinion of Trump worldwide. There are places which actually adore the guy.

As far as US foreign policy is concerned, the rest of the world cannot have failed to notice that Trump didn't start any new war. That's a first since... when really?
He had close encounters with war, the missiles launched against Syria and the assassination against Iran, but somehow someone seems to have made the homework: neither resulted in retaliations and indeed the iranians abandoned the overt policy of interference in Iraq. It was the lowest-cost, highest success foreign policy for the US since Bush I, and more importanto for the rest of the world a respite form the incessant expansion of the american empire of chaos.

Biden has already signaled he will go back to the good old warmongering. The PANC will be back on track. Possibly Iran, either Syria or Turkey, perhaps Venezuela and most likely Ukraine are going to be active war zones.

 

[Estebonrober]

As far as US foreign policy is concerned, the rest of the world cannot have failed to notice that Trump didn't start any new war. That's a first since... when really?
He had close encounters with war, the missiles launched against Syria and the assassination against Iran, but somehow someone seems to have made the homework: neither resulted in retaliations and indeed the iranians abandoned the overt policy of interference in Iraq. It was the lowest-cost, highest success foreign policy for the US since Bush I, and more importanto for the rest of the world a respite form the incessant expansion of the american empire of chaos.

Biden has already signaled he will go back to the good old warmongering. The PANC will be back on track. Possibly Iran, either Syria or Turkey, perhaps Venezuela and most likely Ukraine are going to be active war zones.

So should I jsut assume everything you say is wrong kind of like opposite day?


The narrow objective for drone strikes, of course, is to kill the terrorists who are targeted and thus remove them from the battlefield. By that standard, the program may be deemed a success insofar as, according to government-released statistics, the program has resulted in the deaths of more than 3,000 combatants. It is worthwhile to note, however, that there is significant gap between how the government and NGOs investigate and calculate combatant and civilian casualties in the aftermath of strikes, which results in estimates from NGOs of far higher numbers of civilian casualties (and correspondingly lower combatant casualties).

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/08/trump-war-terror-drones/567218/
.
.
.
https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2019/10/hidden-damage-trumps-secret-war-somalia/160339/

The number of U.S. airstrikes, drone strikes, and ground raids in Somalia have risen each year of the Trump administration: from 13 under Obama in 2016, the annual totals rose to 38 in 2017, 47 in 2018, and 55 so far in 2019, by New America’s count.

.
.
.


https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/iransource/irans-regional-ambitions-are-not-going-anywhere/

Al-Kazemi is certainly not the one the Iranians would like to see as Iraq’s prime minister. But, when Tehran had to choose between him and al-Zurfi, the Iranians were able to unite the major political forces in Iraq against the politician perceived to be the most significant threat to their interests. This time, Iran’s efforts to successfully effect the political process in Iraq were not carried out by Qasem Soleimani. Instead, they were carried out by the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Shamkhani, who visited Baghdad last month and met with al-Kazemi, and by the new Quds Force commander, Esmail Ghaani, who visited Baghdad last week. Yes, the same Ghaani who, some claimed, would find it very difficult to fill Soleimani’s shoes.

What is true about Iran’s regional influence is also true about the stability of its regime and economy. Iran has certainly faced many challenges both at home and abroad, but, just as its regional influence is not declining so quickly, neither will the regime nor its economy be likely to collapse very soon. In fact, years of economic sanctions and the centralization of its economy, which is characterized by extensive involvement by government institutions and by the IRGC, have, somewhat, improved Iran’s ability to adapt to crises.

 

[innonimatu]

The thing you are missing is that these are not new wars. There are territories already wrecked and taken into the american chaos empire. That is the only reason why I didn't count those: the active wars. Seldom does the empire withdraw. As things stand it's good enough if it ceases expanding further.
As for Iraq the US retains its military presence there and the iraqui government no longer even goes through the motions of ordering that military presence withdrawn. The occupation is de facto accepted. The empire is not yet in withdrawal mode.

 

[amadeus]

Errrr...Have you forgotten Clinton balanced the budget and the income of the middle class actually increased for the first time since 73?

A little credit should be given to the GOP Congress under Gingrich; the balanced budget came during Clinton’s second term. Back when Dick Morris was only a benign evil.

 

[Lexicus]

That's a first since... when really?

Obama didn't start any new wars either.

Errrr...Have you forgotten Clinton balanced the budget and the income of the middle class actually increased for the first time since 73?

Clinton balanced the budget and the economy went into recession shortly thereafter.