US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5772

On October 26 2016 11:40 Buckyman wrote:


I'm worried about the domestic consequences. If Clinton wins by too large a margin, she will interpret it as a mandate for her (mostly irrelevant) policy position instead of as a rebuke to Trump's (lack of) position. At which point we'll have an agenda pushed on us that we didn't vote for, on the basis that we voted for it. If she goes this route, expect the Democrats to get clobbered in the congressional midterms.

A strong (>10% combined) showing by Gary Johnson and Jill Stein, on the other hand, is a signal to the parties that they've alienated their marginal voters and can lead to real policy changes attempting to recapture those voters.

On October 26 2016 15:30 kwizach wrote:

Were you referring to this article, and to Clinton's "New College Compact" plan in particular (and how it got ignored by the press at the time)?

On October 26 2016 23:12 oneofthem wrote:

so this is just really quality stuff. not only do you think hrc policies are worse than either stein or johnson, but you somehow think stein/johnson is a single pole of policy when they are on different planets.

your idea of good policy is the problem, and this extends to the electorate in general.

Label GMOs, and put a moratorium on GMOs and pesticides until they are proven safe.

On October 26 2016 23:36 zlefin wrote:

that does rather look like it. I'm not sure but it might well be. @bio you may want to look over that article.
thanks kwiz.

On October 26 2016 23:12 oneofthem wrote:

so this is just really quality stuff. not only do you think hrc policies are worse than either stein or johnson, but you somehow think stein/johnson is a single pole of policy when they are on different planets.

your idea of good policy is the problem, and this extends to the electorate in general.

On October 27 2016 00:15 Trainrunnef wrote:


Does a better job at explaining clinton's policy positions and proposal than clinton herself has ever done on a major stage.

On October 26 2016 21:49 Probe1 wrote:

Basically. Trump may have lost democrat, independent, and moderate republican votes (so the majority) but damn his fans are into him. It was more like a rock concert than a political rally.

I guess that's what you get when you preach to fringe folks that you'll give them everything.

On October 27 2016 00:23 Danglars wrote:

If you lose democrat, independent, and moderate votes and STILL only trail by 4-5 points nationally, we're talking about the absolute slimmest of majorities.

On October 27 2016 00:20 LegalLord wrote:
So why do so many people prefer to vote on Election Day? Besides all these voter suppression issues, I find that it's much harder to make an informed decision on the candidates that I never really heard of if I don't have a chance to look at their campaign materials, which really can't be done while standing in line or something.

On October 26 2016 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:


But Stein and Johnson are really, really different! That resonates with my childish "fuck the system" worldview.

Just look at this platform item by Jill Stein and tell me that doesn't just get you fired up:



Imagine how cool it would be if 88% of corn in the US was suddenly removed from our market. Now THAT would be change I can believe in! Woo boy all this talk just gets me so fired up!

On October 27 2016 00:22 Gorsameth wrote:

No one wants to hear a boring presentation about her plans while on stage. Its all about soundbites and crowd interaction.

On October 26 2016 23:12 oneofthem wrote:

so this is just really quality stuff. not only do you think hrc policies are worse than either stein or johnson, but you somehow think stein/johnson is a single pole of policy when they are on different planets.

On October 27 2016 00:29 MyLovelyLurker wrote:


In fairness though, both main parties have opened a vacuum with how little they cover climate change, so they're vastly responsible for enabling Stein. There was not even a single environment-related question during Wallace's debate, and it's arguably the most important question ( in terms of the scale of its putative consequences, I'm not taking a stand on future scenarios & probabilities ) facing the human race. I would say the US is top 3 in the world in terms of ability to lead and curb world environmental policy, along with China and Germany, and the lack of leadership we are seeing in that regard is simply stunning.

On October 27 2016 00:29 MyLovelyLurker wrote:


In fairness though, both main parties have opened a vacuum with how little they cover climate change, so they're vastly responsible for enabling Stein. There was not even a single environment-related question during Wallace's debate, and it's arguably the most important question ( in terms of the scale of its putative consequences, I'm not taking a stand on future scenarios & probabilities ) facing the human race. I would say the US is top 3 in the world in terms of ability to lead and curb world environmental policy, along with China and Germany, and the lack of leadership we are seeing in that regard is simply stunning.

Climate change is an urgent threat and a defining challenge of our time. It threatens our economy, our national security, and our children’s health and futures. We can tackle it by making America the world’s clean energy superpower and creating millions of good-paying jobs, taking bold steps to slash carbon pollution at home and around the world, and ensuring no Americans are left out or left behind as we rapidly build a clean energy economy.

On day one, Hillary Clinton will set bold, national goals that will be achieved within 10 years of taking office:

Generate enough renewable energy to power every home in America, with half a billion solar panels installed by the end of Hillary’s first term.

Cut energy waste in American homes, schools, hospitals and offices by a third and make American manufacturing the cleanest and most efficient in the world.
Reduce American oil consumption by a third through cleaner fuels and more efficient cars, boilers, ships, and trucks.

Hillary’s plan will deliver on the pledge President Obama made at the Paris climate conference—without relying on climate deniers in Congress to pass new legislation. She will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 30 percent in 2025 relative to 2005 levels and put the country on a path to cut emissions more than 80 percent by 2050.

As president, Hillary will:

Defend, implement, and extend smart pollution and efficiency standards, including the Clean Power Plan and standards for cars, trucks, and appliances that are already helping clean our air, save families money, and fight climate change.

Launch a $60 billion Clean Energy Challenge to partner with states, cities, and rural communities to cut carbon pollution and expand clean energy, including for low-income families. Read the fact sheet here.
Invest in clean energy infrastructure, innovation, manufacturing and workforce development to make the U.S. economy more competitive and create good-paying jobs and careers. Read the fact sheet here.

Ensure safe and responsible energy production. As we transition to a clean energy economy, we must ensure that the fossil fuel production taking place today is safe and responsible and that areas too sensitive for energy production are taken off the table. Read the fact sheet here.

Reform leasing and expand clean energy production on public lands and waters tenfold within a decade.

Cut the billions of wasteful tax subsidies oil and gas companies have enjoyed for too long and invest in clean energy.

Cut methane emissions across the economy and put in place strong standards for reducing leaks from both new and existing sources.

Revitalize coal communities by supporting locally driven priorities and make them an engine of U.S. economic growth in the 21st century, as they have been for generations. Read the fact sheet here.
Make environmental justice and climate justice central priorities by setting bold national goals to eliminate lead poisoning within five years, clean up the more than 450,000 toxic brownfield sites across the country, expand solar and energy efficiency solutions in low-income communities, and create an Environmental and Climate Justice Task Force. Read the fact sheet here.

Promote conservation and collaborative stewardship. Hillary will keep public lands public, strengthen protections for our natural and cultural resources, increase access to parks and public lands for all Americans, as well as harness the immense economic potential they offer through expanded renewable energy production, a high quality of life, and a thriving outdoor economy. Read the fact sheet here.

within 10 years of taking office

On October 27 2016 00:36 Buckyman wrote:


In my experience, this means "I'll take credit for this if it works and blame the next president if it doesn't"

On October 27 2016 00:38 Mohdoo wrote:


Yeah, shame on her for giving realistic timelines instead of the bullshit 3rd parties like to spew. Clinton, as an actual politician, is under pressure to say things that make sense and have a shred of truth. A 3rd partyRepublican candidate would list their agenda as doable in one termwithin 30 days.

On October 27 2016 00:33 zlefin wrote:

Dems cover it all the time, so not sure what you're talking about. agree that more leadership on the issue would be nice.