I get mad whenever anyone refers to Joe Manchin or Kristen Sinema as "moderate Democrats." I am a moderate Democrat, and I support most of what's in Biden's "Build Back Better" plan.
In a close election, any of the numerous things that went wrong can be labelled the cause of the whole debacle. Like you I save my most burning hate for Sirica and his colleagues, but Nader was also sufficient cause, and so was Lieberman etc.
Years ago I read an article in The New Yorker by Elizabeth Kolbert. In it she cited evidence that indicated the impact industrialization has had on the oceans. Since the world's oceans are now absorbing more CO2 than they are emitting --it used to be a steady state, with evap of CO2 equaling absorption-- their pH is changing. They are becoming less basic, less alkaline, if you will. This has a negative affect on mollusks' and other organisms', like diatoms, abilities to synthesize their shells from the chemicals in the water. The shells are becoming softer. They don't live as long, hence threaten the survival of higher organisms that rely on these animals as their food source. The oceans are the base of all life on Earth. The study, she wrote, indicated that if we stopped all fossil fuel use right now... all of it, it would take 300,000 years for the oceans to return to their pre-industrial state.
And from Wiki: "Kolbert states that human activity has transformed between a third and a half of land surface on the planet. We have dammed most of the major rivers of world, increased levels of nitrogen higher than can be fixed naturally by terrestrial ecosystems, used more than half of the world's readily accessible freshwater run-off, removed more than one third of the primary producers of the oceans' coastal waters, and changed the composition of the atmosphere by deforestation and fossil fuel combustion."
We don't have five years. We have negative years. But we still have to try.
Politics is about wielding power effectively, not about demonstrating one's personal virtue. This is understood by the right: they always turn out, even if the candidate on their side isn't really what they wanted.Politicians have to pander to the people who reliably turn out to vote. Progressives always make a big show of demonstrating that they are fickle and cannot be relied on. That is why politicians feel they are not worth playing to.
I guess the Democrats' next logical step is to realize that it doesn't matter whether you have a D or an R in front of your name--a bought politician is a bought politician. Maybe we should think about putting Karl Rove in charge of the DNCC to prevent things like Sinema and Manchin from happening again. We got royally fucked by a couple of obvious cons there.
I don't think that was pope's point, but to show that others propensity to believe it were supported by the Joe L. decision. I HATE the "both are the same" argument too, btw.
I agree with you on being pissed at Nader, but then I like being pissed.
Look at the drop off in voting between 2012 and 2016 in Milwaukee and Lansing alone.
The problem isn't a handful of third party voters, even in a tight race, the problem is all the people who don't bother to vote. If either party could get a fraction of non voters to turn out for them by, I dunno, enacting legislation that helps people, then they would never lose.
But that would take candidates who energize a broader coalition and campaigns that are adept at getting out the vote. It worked in 2018 and 2020, but "Circuit Court Judges" isn't going to energize voters in 2022.
I'm just imagining him in a suit of armor and a hooded cape, shouting "Serve me, Connecticut, for I am your unquestioned leader!" like he's Doctor Doom or something.
I get mad whenever anyone refers to Joe Manchin or Kristen Sinema as "moderate Democrats." I am a moderate Democrat, and I support most of what's in Biden's "Build Back Better" plan.
We are already toast. We are just arguing about how burnt we want to be.
In a close election, any of the numerous things that went wrong can be labelled the cause of the whole debacle. Like you I save my most burning hate for Sirica and his colleagues, but Nader was also sufficient cause, and so was Lieberman etc.
Years ago I read an article in The New Yorker by Elizabeth Kolbert. In it she cited evidence that indicated the impact industrialization has had on the oceans. Since the world's oceans are now absorbing more CO2 than they are emitting --it used to be a steady state, with evap of CO2 equaling absorption-- their pH is changing. They are becoming less basic, less alkaline, if you will. This has a negative affect on mollusks' and other organisms', like diatoms, abilities to synthesize their shells from the chemicals in the water. The shells are becoming softer. They don't live as long, hence threaten the survival of higher organisms that rely on these animals as their food source. The oceans are the base of all life on Earth. The study, she wrote, indicated that if we stopped all fossil fuel use right now... all of it, it would take 300,000 years for the oceans to return to their pre-industrial state.
Here's a related article:
https://www.litcharts.com/l...
And from Wiki: "Kolbert states that human activity has transformed between a third and a half of land surface on the planet. We have dammed most of the major rivers of world, increased levels of nitrogen higher than can be fixed naturally by terrestrial ecosystems, used more than half of the world's readily accessible freshwater run-off, removed more than one third of the primary producers of the oceans' coastal waters, and changed the composition of the atmosphere by deforestation and fossil fuel combustion."
We don't have five years. We have negative years. But we still have to try.
Politics is about wielding power effectively, not about demonstrating one's personal virtue. This is understood by the right: they always turn out, even if the candidate on their side isn't really what they wanted.Politicians have to pander to the people who reliably turn out to vote. Progressives always make a big show of demonstrating that they are fickle and cannot be relied on. That is why politicians feel they are not worth playing to.
I could not fucking believe it when I heard Gore picked the Lieber-head as his running-mate. My thought was: We are doomed.
Agree, but also see below re: scotus intervention.
Didn't Stein rip votes from Hillary? I'm a little fuzzy on that atm.
Pretty big assumption to make about 50,000 voters.
He always looked like he was made out of felt to me. Just the Muppetiest mfer..
I guess the Democrats' next logical step is to realize that it doesn't matter whether you have a D or an R in front of your name--a bought politician is a bought politician. Maybe we should think about putting Karl Rove in charge of the DNCC to prevent things like Sinema and Manchin from happening again. We got royally fucked by a couple of obvious cons there.
I don't think that was pope's point, but to show that others propensity to believe it were supported by the Joe L. decision. I HATE the "both are the same" argument too, btw.
I agree with you on being pissed at Nader, but then I like being pissed.
Some people have no morals. I know, tell you something you don't already know.
Look at the drop off in voting between 2012 and 2016 in Milwaukee and Lansing alone.
The problem isn't a handful of third party voters, even in a tight race, the problem is all the people who don't bother to vote. If either party could get a fraction of non voters to turn out for them by, I dunno, enacting legislation that helps people, then they would never lose.
But that would take candidates who energize a broader coalition and campaigns that are adept at getting out the vote. It worked in 2018 and 2020, but "Circuit Court Judges" isn't going to energize voters in 2022.
It was "FOR" him in fact. What a rotten guy.
I'm just imagining him in a suit of armor and a hooded cape, shouting "Serve me, Connecticut, for I am your unquestioned leader!" like he's Doctor Doom or something.
Edit: He's worse than Doctor Doom.Doom always keeps his word.