Support NeoGAF

[RustyNails]

Doom

 

[starmud]

state polls aside, brown vs warren is going to be sooo good

Warren, Brown in dead heat in Massachusetts Senate race, new poll shows: tpm.ly/KFTrcP

 

[XMonkey]

state polls aside, brown vs warren is going to be sooo good

I dunno... so good to me would be Warren up comfortably.

 

[Chumly]

Sounds like he is balancing the pros and cons of each situation.

Also, isn't the ozone improving? Imposing new stricter standards seems crazy if what we are already doing is fixing the core problem enough.

Nice to see logic enter the equation for once.

The biggest issue I see, from what I know with Arctic drilling, is a tanker running into something. I'm glad it's been pushed back as long as it has, as tech has dramatically improved since... of course if they cut corners again, it won't matter.

I don't want to veer off too much but ozone depletion is mainly caused by chlorofluorocarbons (CFC's as you mentioned).

From the article

The Earth's natural ozone shield has been gradually depleted by chemical reactions involving chlorine, which is released from CFCs in the stratosphere. With ozone depletion, more UV radiation reaches the ground, leading to health and environmental problems.

Since the Antarctic ozone hole was first discovered in 1980, nations have joined forces to restore the ozone to a better state. In 1987, The Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer, an international treaty, was put in place to protect the ozone layer by phasing out the production of numerous substances believed to be responsible for ozone depletion. More than 190 nations agreed to ban ozone-depleting chemicals.

CFC's aren't the only form of pollution or thing affecting our environment. So just because someone doesn't release a bunch of it doesn't mean they aren't affecting the environment through other things through like CO2. So I guess I'm just wasn't for sure what your point was about the ozone and arctic drilling.

 

[gcubed]

LINK



His solution to this civil rights issue our our era is to make poor people drive to "good" schools. Nevermind that they don't have the time or money to drive their kids to schools that are far away. Nevermind the fact that the vouchers will most likely not cover the full expenses on a lot of schools. Nevermind the fact that good schools will fill up and not have room for poor kids (actually they are already full). I wonder how many poor kids could get into Romney's high school on his voucher program. Im sure a lot.

maybe poor people should try harder so they can afford private drivers or their mothers who havent worked a day in their lives can drive them there?

 

[LilZippa]

Saw this on TV last night

Here is video of Mitt Romney’s first 2012 General Election Campaign Ad: “Day One.” It highlights three things President Romney would do on “Day One” as President:
1. “President Romney immediately approves the Keystone Pipeline.”
2. “President Romney introduces Tax Cuts & Reforms that reward job creators – not punish them.”
3. “President Romney issues the order to begin replacing ObamaCare with common sense healthcare reform.”

How is this any kind of plan.

1. Approve a BS talking point project with no real job or oil price impact. And this is just being reviewed more before approval anyway.
2. Cut more taxes to balance that budget
3. Repeal ObamaCare and replace it with the same thing with a different name.

What a joke. This is his real campaign ad?

 

[gcubed]

is the keystone pipeline that big of a deal?

 

[sc0la]

3. Repeal ObamaCare and replace it with the same thing with a different name.

While this was patterned on Mass. and used concepts backed by the Heritage Foundation etc. the core concepts have become toxic in the GOP. He won't replace it with "the same thing"

It will go back to status quo, maybe keep pre existing conditions, destroy the exchanges and do meaningless tort reform and buying across state lines. Maybe they will get ballsy and try to do Medicare vouchers too.

 

[LilZippa]

is the keystone pipeline that big of a deal?

This ad is tailored to the group who is already voting for him. That is why I don't understand why he is wasting TV time with this.

 

[RustyNails]

is the keystone pipeline that big of a deal?

Yup. It's kind of a big deal to Big Oil.

New report shows Keystone XL pipeline would increase gas prices

As gas prices increased early this year the Keystone XL pipeline became a central issue in the United States energy debate. Republicans contended that President Obama was not pursuing fossil fuels aggressively enough, and cited the delayed Keystone XL pipeline as an example. The Obama administration argued that fossil fuel production has increased under his watch, and that an “all of the above” strategy including alternative energy sources was needed. Now, a new study shows that even if Keystone XL was built it likely would not help decrease gas prices, and may actually make the situation worse.

The report was authored Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), a non-profit environmental organization with more than 1.3 million members. The source of the study will surely be criticized by proponents of the Keystone XL project. However, opponents of the Keystone XL would likely point to the rationale behind the conclusions.

In the report, the NRDC contends that the Keystone Pipeline would actually reduce the amount of gasoline available to U.S. consumers, therefore increasing the cost of oil by “tens of billions of dollars.”

As the study points out, the pipeline would direct more oil to Texas refineries. The problem is that these refineries produce more diesel fuel than gasoline. As a result, when oil is diverted from Midwestern refineries, which produce more gasoline, the overall supply of gasoline would go down.

In addition, refineries along the Gulf Coast are much more likely to export their oil to other countries given their access to Gulf of Mexico. The refineries which receive oil from the Keystone XL pipeline would have no obligation to sell their finished products to the United States. Instead, the diesel and gasoline they produce would go on the world market and be sold to the highest bidder. Gasoline is cheaper in the United States than most places in the world. As a result, much of the oil sent through the Keystone XL pipeline would simply end up being exported to other countries.

 

[Black Republican]

state polls aside, brown vs warren is going to be sooo good

Like I said with walker recall, I can see brown keeping his seat, dems excuse will be?

 

[Tim-E]

I'm tired of it, guys. When is Obama going to push the "low unemployment rate" and "low gas prices" buttons? Maybe Mitt Romney just knows where these buttons are located and Obama is still looking around for them.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Jobless Claims holding steady

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...were-little-changed-at-370-000-last-week.html

Down 2000.

Durable Goods Orders Up

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/2012-05-24/durable-goods/55182704/1

Up 0.2% compared to decline of 3.7% in March. That is good

Factory Output rose 0.6%

 

[eznark]

Like I said with walker recall, I can see brown keeping his seat, dems excuse will be?

Walker up 8 in the latest poll today.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/purple-wisconsin/153349235.html#!page=0&pageSize=10&sort=newestfirst

The Wisconsin democtartic bombthrowers have taken to calling Scott Walker a Cubs fan. That's the last ditch effort? Man, at least dig up a picture of him and Favre or something.

More on the poll:

For instance, the poll is consistent with other polls in showing 72 percent of Wisconsinites in favor of requiring public employees to pay into their own pension accounts. 71 percent of respondents also favored requiring state employees to pay 12 percent of their health insurance premiums rather than six percent. We've seen these numbers before.

But it appears Walker's arguments regarding public employees have begun to take hold. 65 percent of respondents said they thought public sector workers receive better pension and health care benefits than private sector workers, 22 percent say benefit levels are about the same, and just 7 percent believe private sector retirement benefits are better than those in the public sector.

Talk about your all time backfires...

I'm tired of it, guys. When is Obama going to push the "low unemployment rate" and "low gas prices" buttons? Maybe Mitt Romney just knows where these buttons are located and Obama is still looking around for them.

It's May. He'd be foolish to rush into a focus on the economy at this point, it's not like we're growing at break neck speeds. Better to wait til late Summer when there is less likely to be a turn.

 

[Sirpopopop]

To continue the veer off topic.

Montreal Protocol Did What Kyoto Protocol could not.

I wonder how Republicans deal with the fact that Ronald Reagan signed a treaty designed to protect the ENVIRONMENT over JOBS.

I should probably check with remnant on that issue.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Those two protocols are so vastly different in their scope and effect, why would anyone even equate them?

 

[Baraka in the White House]

Yup. It's kind of a big deal to Big Oil.

I work in a Gulf Coast refinery and some of those claims sound strange to me. Like diesel, we most certainly do not make more diesel than gasoline and we're one of the largest refineries in the country. And we almost never transport fuels by any method other than regional pipelines. The vast majority of our seaborne exports are solvents, chemicals and lubes.

Anecdotal, I know.

 

[eznark]

I work in a Gulf Coast refinery and some of those claims sound strange to me. Like diesel, we most certainly do not make more diesel than gasoline and we're one of the largest refineries in the country. And we almost never transport fuels by any method other than regional pipelines. The vast majority of our seaborne exports are solvents, chemicals and lubes.

Anecdotal, I know.

NRDC

 

[cartoon_soldier]

I know Politico was bad, but National Journal is sounding like that too now. Everyday I go there the top news story and analysis are about how Romney is doing good and how the election is bad for Obama, or something else is bad for Obama.

They even did a so called news story on Romney's education piece that went, "The one area in which Romney will shine is vouchers for charter schools"

 

[el retorno]

I know Politico was bad, but National Journal is sounding like that too now. Everyday I go there the top news story and analysis are about how Romney is doing good and how the election is bad for Obama, or something else is bad for Obama.

They even did a so called news story on Romney's education piece that went, "The one area in which Romney will shine is vouchers for charter schools"

I went to their page. They have the average gas price from over a month ago still up.

 

[codhand]

The fact that Walker is up so big is really depressing, but indicative of the electorate in Wisconsin, basically, democrats overestimated their base. Walker drew a very clear line in the sand, I don't wanna hear that a lack of DNC funding is what held Wisconsin Dems back, when in reality Wisconsin is clearly not that blue, because any state that was, would have no trouble recalling Walker after such a blatant affront to labor was made.

Maybe someone from Wisconsin gaf could help me out here.

 

[cartoon_soldier]

Wisconsin is blue. The same thing that helps Obama with economy getting better helps Walker too. And the public gets tired of too many elections. They voted in 2008, then 2010, then again in 2011 recall + main and now have to vote in 2012 recall + main and again in 2012 GE.

Wisconsin Dems were stupid to go ahead with the recall this year. They would have had a better chance to throw him out in the re-election.

 

[codhand]

Wisconsin Dems were stupid

I dunno, the reason stated is basically that they just don't wanna vote again? Again the lack of motivation is a clear indicator to me that the Wisconsin demographic is not how its democratic citizens pictured. Why do they need any motivation at all? It was the clearest bitch slap to labor ever, and they are too tired of voting?

 

[eznark]

Wisconsin is blue.

Only in terms of the presidential vote.

It was the clearest bitch slap to labor ever, and they are too tired of voting?

Problem is, there aren't enough union members to decide the election and the majority of Wisconsin is pleased with the changes (see the poll I posted above).

 

[The Librarian]

Only in terms of the presidential vote.

Oh, so now it's a blue state for presidents.

 

[codhand]

The polls you mentioned are disingenuous, the poll should be "do you favor dissolving unions altogether", again if Wisconsin can't determine what is actually going on, without further explanation than I find it hard having sympathy, labor is in a sad state these days, Walker proves it, not just at a state level but nationally too. He saw blood in the water, and he was right.

Scott Brown being tied with Elizabeth Warren is the same thing, Mass. just like having the good looking politician, doesn't really matter where he stands.

 

[eznark]

Indiana and others started this years ago. Unions just decided to make Wisconsin their line in the sand and it looks like they'll be soundly rebuffed. Nobodies fault but their own. It was a very poor strategic decision.

Oh, so now it's a blue state for presidents.

What? Historically it's voted for Democrats in presidential elections, however it's always been single digits close (save twice in 75 years or so). I think there is a chance it goes for Romney this year but I doubt it.

I do think the two senate seats will be comfortably GOP though. A state with a republican governor, senate, house, majority of Representatives and Senators are GOP. You're really going to call that a "blue state?"

That seems goofy and simplistic.

(that all made more sense before your stealth edit)

 

[The Librarian]

What? Historically it's voted for Democrats in presidential elections, however it's always been single digits close (save twice in 75 years or so). I think there is a chance it goes for Romney this year but I doubt it.

Earlier this month you were arguing that Wisconsin wasn't a blue state for the presidency, or you were leading the charge in doubting it. Now it is? I'll wait for the next batch of polls before you say, "This is interesting."

I do think the two senate seats will be comfortably GOP though. A state with a republican governor, senate, house, majority of Representatives and Senators are GOP. You're really going to call that a "blue state?"

When did I call Wisconsin a blue state? The State Senate is going to flip to Democrats in the fall, and I wouldn't count Baldwin out just yet.

 

[ToxicAdam]

The fact that Walker is up so big is really depressing, but indicative of the electorate in Wisconsin, basically, democrats overestimated their base. .

I think it's more that Democrats assumed the low poll numbers for Walker/Kasich were linked to their policy decisions, but more likely they were tied to the economic conditions of that time.

Reclaiming two senate seats and getting Kasich's SB5 overturned only encouraged them down that path.

 

[codhand]

It was a very poor strategic decision.

I don't understand, it wasn't a strategy it was a reaction to something. How could they have gone about it any better than positive national headlines for a month?

We are moving away from organized labor as a country (not just recently) the fact that people say they prefer it that way is just proof, but doesn't make it any less sad.

 

[eznark]

Earlier this month you were arguing that Wisconsin wasn't a blue state for the presidency, or you were leading the charge in doubting it. Now it is? I'll wait for the next batch of polls before you say, "This is interesting."

When did I call Wisconsin a blue state? The State Senate is going to flip to Democrats in the fall, and I wouldn't count Baldwin out just yet.

I was speaking historically, however it's in play every year. My argument has always been predicated on having a good candidate. Obama blowing out McCain anywhere is about as significant as the Packers destroying a high school team. It was an outlier.

I don't think Romney will win Wisconsin and I don't ever think I said he would. If the economy tanks then he has an outside shot, but that will be voting against Obama, and the "anti-xxx" vote is never successful. Romney is hot garbage.

I don't understand, it wasn't a strategy it was a reaction to something. How could they have gone about it any better than positive national headlines for a month?

They Dems simply should not have supported the recall. The end result is that it will be a huge vote of confidence for Walker and has allowed him to collect millions upon millions of dollars for his next election.

 

[The Librarian]

I don't think Romney will win Wisconsin and I don't ever think I said he would. If the economy tanks then he has an outside shot, but that will be voting against Obama, and the "anti-xxx" vote is never successful. Romney is hot garbage.

No. Just your continuous posts about "look at how much of the officers the GOP holds!" and posting polling information showing the race tightening over there. Nope. That wasn't implying anything. So you were just saying all of that when in fact you that none of it mattered? Okay.

 

[eznark]

No. Just your continuous posts about "look at how much of the officers the GOP holds!" and posting polling information showing the race tightening over there. Nope. That wasn't implying anything. So you were just saying all of that when in fact you that none of it mattered? Okay.

My point in those Romney/Obama polls wasn't that Romney would win but that the recall efforts have seemingly backfired. Those posts were also in conjunction with people getting upset over the national party not putting more effort into the recall and Barrett's campaign. Those posts didn't happen in a vacuum. As with pretty much all my posts in this thread anymore, it was about strategy.

 

[mckmas8808]

dat shale boom



Link (reg. required)

I LOVE this quote.

“This is a success story based on a combination of policy and technology"


Jesus Christ I wish more politicians could work and think like this. To solve issues you will ALWAYS have to take a balanced approach.

 

[The Librarian]

My point in those Romney/Obama polls wasn't that Romney would win but that the recall efforts have seemingly backfired. Those posts were also in conjunction with people getting upset over the national party not putting more effort into the recall and Barrett's campaign. Those posts didn't happen in a vacuum. As with pretty much all my posts in this thread anymore, it was about strategy.

No. What you're doing is approaching Kosmo-level "I'm not saying anything here but this is interesting!" Wisconsin is either a state that will remain blue this presidential election or it won't, despite all the INTERESTING *wink wink* data and figures you post. Pick a stance and stick with it.

 

[codhand]

No. What you're doing is approaching Kosmo-level "I'm not saying anything here but this is interesting!" Wisconsin is either a state that will remain blue this presidential election or it won't, despite all the INTERESTING *wink wink* data and figures you post, or it's not. Pick a stance and stick with it.

 

[mckmas8808]

Not sanity. Silliness. Decided unseriousness.

Ain't nothing silly about it.

 

[Sirpopopop]

Those two protocols are so vastly different in their scope and effect, why would anyone even equate them?

Both deal with environmental concerns that revolve around air pollutants.

They were both international treaties.

It's fairly easy to see why they would be equated.

 

[Chumly]

Yup. It's kind of a big deal to Big Oil.

I've never understood how people are so disillusioned to think that gas prices will crater if we open up a few wells/pipelines. Big oil doesn't want 2 dollar gas. They want 4 dollar gas and no environmental restrictions. Plus a lot of oil is not feasible to extract at lower prices

 

[mckmas8808]

I've never understood how people are so disillusioned to think that gas prices will crater if we open up a few wells/pipelines. Big oil doesn't want 2 dollar gas. They want 4 dollar gas and no environmental restrictions. Plus a lot of oil is not feasible to extract at lower prices

Gas prices could go down if the Keystone Pipeline is opened completly. But it wouldn't be much at all! It'll be so small that nobody would even notice.

 

[empty vessel]

Jesus Christ I wish more politicians could work and think like this. To solve issues you will ALWAYS have to take a balanced approach.

What issues do you suppose were solved?

 

[ToxicAdam]

Both deal with environmental concerns that revolve around air pollutants.
They were both international treaties.
It's fairly easy to see why they would be equated.

One affects a handful of industries and was easily mitigated, the other affects every person and every industry and has proven to be almost impossible to mitigate. One had almost universal support, the other was not universally supported.

ODS = 638500 metric tonnes (1980)
CO2 = 36.6 billion metric tons. (2010)

For its part, it can be said that Kyoto raised public awareness about climate change, which in turn helped those countries that made specific commitments meet their targets, with some notable exceptions: Australia, Spain and Canada, which saw a 20 per cent increase in overall CO2 emissions between 1990 and 2010.

Still, over that same 20-year period, global emissions rose 45 per cent, largely as a result of the phenomenally rapid industrializing of China, India, Brazil and others in the developing world.

As it turns out, that is the exact same rate of increase -- 45 per cent -- that GHG emissions rose in the 20 years prior to 1990, albeit off a smaller base. As far as the planet is concerned, though, nothing much has changed but geography.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/12/11/kyoto-canada-climate-change_n_1142840.html

 

[Blergmeister]

Gas prices could go down if the Keystone Pipeline is opened completly. But it wouldn't be much at all! It'll be so small that nobody would even notice.

There was a post earlier today stating that even thit might not be clear. The reasoning was that right now the oil goes to midwest refineries where it tends to be sold within the states. With the pipeline the oil going to gulf refineries it would more likely get sold out of country and, therefore, possibly even raise prices.

 

[eznark]

No. What you're doing is approaching Kosmo-level "I'm not saying anything here but this is interesting!" Wisconsin is either a state that will remain blue this presidential election or it won't, despite all the INTERESTING *wink wink* data and figures you post. Pick a stance and stick with it.

Personally I don't equate polling trends reported in the largest paper in the state in question to be "interesting" in the same way as a Breitbart smear piece. Maybe you do (which is odd), and if so I understand your consternation. I'm certainly saying that data and the trends in question are interesting, dare I say fascinating.

It's May, I'm not going to "pick a stance and stick with it!" based on May data. Wisconsin is certainly the Dems state to lose in most presidential elections, however it's not a lock year in and year out. The redistricting and the voter id laws will make it even more difficult to keep the state in the blue column should those make it through the court challenges. Now (as always) I think Obama will win WI, should continue to shift my opinion will likely shift with them. Call it an "evolving" position if it will lower your blood pressure.

I personally find the Wisconsin situation incredibly interesting precisely because of its fluidity. Plus, Gary Johnson got 6% in this latest poll!

What's wrong with the NRDC?

Nothing. They just funded the conclusions.

And no, I don't live in Wisconsin anymore but I still follow the politics there closely. Mitch already steam rolled labor years ago here in Indiana, so there is nothing interesting going on here anymore.

 

[The Librarian]

Personally I don't equate polling trends reported in the largest paper in the state in question to be "interesting" in the same way as a Breitbart smear piece. Maybe you do (which is odd), and if so I understand your consternation. I'm certainly saying that data and the trends in question are interesting, dare I say fascinating.

My blood pressure is fine, but I do think it's funny you think I was comparing what you were doing to some piece from Breitbart. I just think it's annoying how when someone points out that Wisconsin will go blue, you rolled in saying "Maybe not, look at these interesting figures," and a couple of weeks later you say the same thing.

But whatever, I mean, it's all "entertainment" to you after all.

 

[eznark]

My blood pressure is fine, but I do think it's funny you think I was comparing what you were doing to some piece from Breitbart. I just think it's annoying how when someone points out that Wisconsin will go blue, you rolled in saying "Maybe not, look at these interesting figures," and a couple of weeks later you say the same thing.

But whatever, I mean, it's all "entertainment" to you after all.

It is "blue" (on a binary scale), however the affect of the recall seems to be shifting in to the GOP. There is nothing inconsistent in my statements whatsoever.

I'm not sure why you'd be annoyed. If a poll comes out next week saying that Romney is winning by 50 in Wisconsin and Obama is arrested for raping a squirrel, should I still say that Obama is going to win Wisconsin just because I said he would do so a few weeks ago?

You're right on the last note though, and there are no quotation marks required.

 

[The Librarian]

It is "blue" (on a binary scale), however the affect of the recall seems to be shifting in to the GOP. There is nothing inconsistent in my statements whatsoever.

I once claimed that barring a severe slow down in jobs growth or another recession, Wisconsin will vote blue. You then rolled in and basically told me the following: "Not really! Look at how much the GOP controls the state!" Earlier today you said Obama will likely win in the fall. What was the point of your original post? If it was all about "trends," you were remarkably vague.

I'm not sure why you'd be annoyed. If a poll comes out next week saying that Romney is winning by 50 in Wisconsin and Obama is arrested for raping a squirrel, should I still say that Obama is going to win Wisconsin just because I said he would do so a few weeks ago?

What in the world does that have to do with what I'm saying?

 

[eznark]

I once claimed that barring a severe slow down in jobs growth or another recession, Wisconsin will vote blue. You then rolled in and basically told me the following: "Not really! Look at how much the GOP controls the state!" Earlier today you said Obama will likely win in the fall. What was the point of your original post? If it was all about "trends," you were remarkably vague.

I honestly don't remember the context so I have no idea. I've always said it's likely Obama will win Wisconsin and I've said all along Obama will win easily. (That's not actually true, before the first debate I thought that Perry would be able to at least stay within 5 points of him). I'm pretty darn positive I've never once claimed Romney would win Wisconsin though. The only time I really ever even respond to those is when someone claims Wisconsin is some sort of Democratic stronghold. I must have taken your comment to be saying something along those lines.

What in the world does that have to do with what I'm saying?

You're asking me to "pick a side and stick with it" however I'm going to continue to interpreting the trends as they present, which will probably make my "side" swing from month to month. I'm going to bet that Romney will be leading Obama at some point in June in Wisconsin though.

 

[Stinkles]

Gas prices could go down if the Keystone Pipeline is opened completly. But it wouldn't be much at all! It'll be so small that nobody would even notice.

keystone is an EXPORT pipe. The only natural consequences of it opening fully are price increases when we pay to import it again as gasoline. Keystone is a joke and a damoclean sword.

 

[The Librarian]

You're asking me to "pick a side and stick with it" however I'm going to continue to interpreting the trends as they present, which will probably make my "side" swing from month to month. I'm going to bet that Romney will be leading Obama at some point in June in Wisconsin though.

WI is a lean Dem state; I never claimed it was a stronghold. How could it be if a slow down in jobs growth will make it go red?

You're reading too much into that. If all you're posts have been about trends and strategies then just ignore it.