You didn't watch the presidential debate last night

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by BurnPyro, Sep 27, 2016.

  1. super71

    super71 I need me some PIE!

    I just don't understand that after 71 pages Europeans still can't figure out why the popular vote would never work, it's actually mind blowing to me.

    Democrats jumped all over Trump when he said he'd want a recount if Hilary wins, Hilary loses and the democrats get a recount ? No harm no foul guys put the pitchforks down Hilary wanted the recount, "media mumbles to itself and says alright Hilary whatever you say and head's home". Too anyone that says Stein has any part of this would be laughed out of any room of intelligent people.

    Their has been more rigging by democrats this year than any year prior, I've always known both sides cheated but it's never been so blatantly obvious and the media just doesn't give two ****s anymore how badly they cheat for Hilary. It's also interesting to me that California, Texas primarily illegal immigration states would want to secede from the union. Bunch of fools in Texas and California, California won the popular vote because it has almost 3 million illegals.

    The whole world has gone to Bane Shift, rather than unifying all the common folk we sit and dribble on about politics when we are robbed daily by big government and big banks. It will be far too late by the time we realize what's happening in the United States and other weaker countries will be next.
    DarkJello likes this.
  2. darklord48

    darklord48 Forum Royalty

    SPiEkY likes this.
  3. SPiEkY

    SPiEkY King of Jesters

    DarkJello and darklord48 like this.
  4. Saandro

    Saandro I need me some PIE!

    Inb4 Californian missile crisis.
    DarkJello likes this.
  5. newsbuff

    newsbuff Forum Royalty

    quoted for f|_|ckin truth!

    I've been saying this for years: green is the new red. What I mean is that conservatives and many libertarians recognize the environmentalist agenda for what it is: thinly-veiled anti-capitalism. That said, there are legitimate conservationist goals that right and left can agree on, if pursued sincerely and not in the spirit of smashing industry and hamstringing American business to the benefit of our rivals.
    DarkJello, Ragic and SPiEkY like this.
  6. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    Ugh this again?

    mine is severely out of date
  7. BurnPyro

    BurnPyro Forum Royalty


    I don't even know what to say to this
  8. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    It's another conspiracy theory but lets try and follow his logic.

    @newsbuff please explain.
  9. SPiEkY

    SPiEkY King of Jesters

    Just bear in mind that you and yours also get this same reaction from the other side every time you bring this same topic up.
  10. Ragic

    Ragic I need me some PIE!

    the sheep rarely know what the shepherd is up to. just keep baa baa'ing like a good little leftie.
  11. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    there are sides? this is the problem with you guys. everything is a competition between teams

    can someone turn that off?
    BurnPyro likes this.
  12. SPiEkY

    SPiEkY King of Jesters

    There's pretty clearly "sides". Don't play stupid and act like I just want my "team" to "win".
  13. BurnPyro

    BurnPyro Forum Royalty

    Everything is always against America, all about America yada yada


    the arrogance and short sightedness sometimes
  14. SPiEkY

    SPiEkY King of Jesters

    Not saying you're wrong, but I wasn't talking specifically about America at all, so don't quote me in that like it somehow supports what you're trying to claim.
    DarkJello likes this.
  15. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    clearly you have not yet realised we are ALL on the same side.
  16. SPiEkY

    SPiEkY King of Jesters

    Yeah, I'm out.
  17. BurnPyro

    BurnPyro Forum Royalty

    you quoted me quoting newsbuff

    who was clearly waving his flag and drinking his coolaid

    Also quick reminder bobjob style that the venn diagram of people that call others sheeple and people that need to be shot for subpar intelligence is a circle.
  18. Geressen

    Geressen Forum Royalty

    good, now news and ragic can explain the conspiracy as I have asked.

    you weren't replying to it I imagine they are currently compiling evidence and will have presented the case when I wake up.
  19. super71

    super71 I need me some PIE!

    Most Americans could only dream
  20. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    Don't know how it is "thinly-veiled." A large part of the platform is about government intervention to deal with the externalities.

    Whether one agrees that we should do something about the environment or not, it should be clear to BOTH sides that economic development has impact on the environment - the difference between the 2 sides is whether something should be done about it, and how much, by the government.

    For me, the cost of the externalities is worth dealing with, especially when there are also benefits to dealing with them. First, these efforts deal with the external cost to the environment - which I value. Some might value it more, or less, but I believe the cost to society is non-zero. Second, there is a health cost - people get sick more with pollution, etc. Third, there is a tourism cost - China could be a huge tourism attraction, but pollution is driving away that potential (we'll talk more about China in a bit). Fourth, there is the future cleanup costs - a lot of economic activity creates environment problems that are not apparent initially, and has to be contained or cleaned up decades down the road (this is one of the EPA's jobs, incidentally:

    What about the benefits?

    First, we have energy independence. The US in the past has invested heavily in fossil fuels and nuclear:


    These industries were previously nurtured and supported by the government and has provided countless number of jobs and economic growth as a result (and even now continue to enjoy tax breaks and subsidies). Second, we have technological advancement. The US has been a tech leader for much of its existence, and should continue investment in that future. Third, being a global leader in technology and policy gives leverage on the international stage, both in terms of politics, as well as in things like trade. Fourth, efficiency gains induced by regulations helps with energy independence as well as makes the US economy more efficient and competitive on the global market.

    China is currently pursuing this path - part of it is driven by a pollution crisis and wanting to their population happy, but they are also striving for energy independence and are well on their own to being a global leader in renewable technologies and policy.


    Meanwhile, under Trump, the path appears to be take away investments in renewables and try and "bring back coal jobs." Jobs that have been going away for DECADES...


    And now that China's coal demand has peaked and is declining in the last couple of years (and note that China's demand for Coal basically matches what the REST OF THE WORLD uses, so if China is moving away from it...)... where are those jobs going to come from exactly?


    I honestly don't know why people think we should be looking backwards - climate change or not. Especially when even places like Texas have started taking up the mantle - and they are doing it for economic reasons, not environmental.

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Nov 30, 2016
    Tweek516 likes this.

Share This Page