All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[Jack Dracula]

That doesn't tell the whole story, for example -

"A special characteristic of aircraft emissions is that most of them are produced at cruising altitudes high in the atmosphere. Scientific studies have shown that these high-altitude emissions have a more harmful climate impact because they trigger a series of chemical reactions and atmospheric effects that have a net warming effect. The IPCC, for example, has estimated that the climate impact of aircraft is two to four times greater than the effect of their carbon dioxide emissions alone."

https://davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can...limate-change/

The above is also why volcanic emissions can cause devastating climate effects if the plume reaches a high enough altitude. Oh, and how the ozone hole formed.

All of which still doesn't change the fact that the "activists fly by plane and are therefore hypocrites" meme is BS.

[Mister Mets]

Flying accounts for two percent of global emissions. If we were ALL to give it up tomorrow, the impact on climate would be negligible. We have to make changes but that requires a hugely data-driven approach to deal with what the massive contributions are on large scale and also in aggregate but, hey, why talk about that when we can yuk it up about activists still needing to take a plane?

Really, this talking point serves no useful purpose except to try to discredit activism in service of denialism, more often than not.

Flying is a small percentage of total emissions, but it is also an example of a small group of people having outsized impact, so it affects less people than other potential policies.

There are plenty of denialist based attacks, but it is a legitimate question about whether the people who want others to change their habits are unwilling to the same, asking for a reduction in the quality of life for others while not explaining why they are exempt.

They listed 8 days with Obama having a higher rating for 5 days to trump's 3 days. The link also provided an image that has Obama with an overall higher rating than trump yet the article still claims that trump is on top? Ok.

The article showed that while Obama's approval rating started higher it did end up roughly where Trump's is now. That's worrisome for people who expect Trump to lose reelection, since it indicates that Trump could easily follow in Obama's footsteps (hell he could be a bit behind Obama and still win the popular vote; he could be a few points behind Obama and win the electoral college.) This would be an indication that Democrats need to worry about electability.

As Democrats Flip Flop on Impeachment, Here's What The Polls Say

Mixed signals from public and weak messaging from Dems.

Personally, I believe that the only way to get support for Impeachment is to start having public impeachment hearings.

The impeachment question isn't an easy one. Support for Nixon's impeachment went up as the trial went on, but part of it is that they found major smoking guns during the investigation (including Nixon ordering the CIA director to interfere with the FBI's investigation into Watergate.) But if Democrats start with an impeachment process, the base might not let them be able to stop if they don't have a similar level of evidence, or if the stuff they find is a bit more ambiguous. Do they want to die on the hill that it is impeachable for Donald Trump to seek out information about Biden's unqualified drug-addict son's dealings in Ukraine? It may just be easier to focus on defeating Trump at the ballot box.

[Tami]

Flying is a small percentage of total emissions, but it is also an example of a small group of people having outsized impact, so it affects less people than other potential policies.

There are plenty of denialist based attacks, but it is a legitimate question about whether the people who want others to change their habits are unwilling to the same, asking for a reduction in the quality of life for others while not explaining why they are exempt.

The article showed that while Obama's approval rating started higher it did end up roughly where Trump's is now. That's worrisome for people who expect Trump to lose reelection, since it indicates that Trump could easily follow in Obama's footsteps (hell he could be a bit behind Obama and still win the popular vote; he could be a few points behind Obama and win the electoral college.) This would be an indication that Democrats need to worry about electability.

The impeachment question isn't an easy one. Support for Nixon's impeachment went up as the trial went on, but part of it is that they found major smoking guns during the investigation (including Nixon ordering the CIA director to interfere with the FBI's investigation into Watergate.) But if Democrats start with an impeachment process, the base might not let them be able to stop if they don't have a similar level of evidence, or if the stuff they find is a bit more ambiguous. Do they want to die on the hill that it is impeachable for Donald Trump to seek out information about Biden's unqualified drug-addict son's dealings in Ukraine? It may just be easier to focus on defeating Trump at the ballot box.

WTF? Where did you get that one from?

[Jack Dracula]

I think Democrats would be better off ignoring polls at the moment. Trumps popularity really doesn't matter in the long term. Focusing on breaking McConnell's hold on the Senate should be the primary concern. If Trump is elected, the roadblock to impeachment will be gone and he'll not make it through his second term.

[Celgress]

All of which still doesn't change the fact that the "activists fly by plane and are therefore hypocrites" meme is BS.

I never said anything such thing. I merely pointed out well-vetted scientific evidence of the disproportion damage jet fuel does to the atmosphere due to the high altitude where it is often released.

[Celgress]

WTF? Where did you get that one from?

That (unfounded) rumor about Biden's son has been making the rounds for a while in Alt-Right circles. I listen to a lot of conspiracy vids on Youtube (both extreme left and extreme right), mostly for laughs, and I heard it shortly after the Ukrainian crisis occurred.

[Tami]

That (unfounded) rumor about Biden's son has been making the rounds for a while in Alt-Right circles. I listen to a lot of conspiracy vids on Youtube (both extreme left and extreme right), mostly for laughs, and I heard it shortly after the Ukrainian crisis occurred.

It says something about Mets that he actually believes it.

[Celgress]

It says something about Mets that he actually believes it.

I'll let your comment speak for itself.

Edit - Oh, the Godfather of the Alt-Right (IMO) Rush Limbaugh has also mentioned this "theory" in the past as has the even more extreme radio host Michael Savage.

[Mister Mets]

WTF? Where did you get that one from?

It's pretty well-known that Hunter Biden has abused drugs.

It was covered in a New Yorker profile.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...thers-campaign

At the same time, the gossip pages have seized on Hunter’s tumultuous private life. He has struggled for decades with alcohol addiction and drug abuse; he went through an acrimonious divorce from his first wife, Kathleen Buhle Biden; and he had a subsequent relationship with Beau’s widow, Hallie. He was recently sued for child support by an Arkansas woman, Lunden Alexis Roberts, who claims that he is the father of her child. (Hunter has denied having sexual relations with Roberts.)

That fall, Hunter made plans to go to the Grace Grove Lifestyle Center, in Sedona, Arizona. During a layover at Los Angeles International Airport, before his connecting flight to Phoenix, he went to a nearby hotel bar and realized that he had left his wallet on the plane. It had belonged to Beau and still contained his attorney-general identification badge, and also Hunter’s driver’s license, without which he couldn’t board his flight. Using a credit card he had in his pocket, Hunter checked into a hotel in Marina del Rey, where he waited for the airline to return the wallet.

Instead of going to Grace Grove, Hunter stayed in Los Angeles for about a week. He said that he “needed a way to forget,” and that, soon after his arrival in L.A., he asked a homeless man in Pershing Square where he could buy crack. Hunter said that the man took him to a nearby homeless encampment, where, in a narrow passageway between tents, someone put a gun to his head before realizing that he was a buyer. He returned to buy more crack a few times that week.

It says something about Mets that he actually believes it.

What does it say that you guys have never heard about it?

Does it represent a failure of the media? Are your sources of information cherry-picking what stories to cover?

That (unfounded) rumor about Biden's son has been making the rounds for a while in Alt-Right circles. I listen to a lot of conspiracy vids on Youtube (both extreme left and extreme right), mostly for laughs, and I heard it shortly after the Ukrainian crisis occurred.

He was kicked out of the Naval Reserve for testing positive for cocaine.

Awareness of his drug problem isn't an alt-right thing.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-...est-1413499657

https://www.cnn.com/2014/10/16/polit...avy/index.html

[Jack Dracula]

There are plenty of denialist based attacks, but it is a legitimate question about whether the people who want others to change their habits are unwilling to the same, asking for a reduction in the quality of life for others while not explaining why they are exempt.

Sort of like the Republican politicians who voted to destroy the ACA while enjoying the free platinum health coverage provided to them and their family members.

[Tendrin]

That doesn't tell the whole story, for example -

"A special characteristic of aircraft emissions is that most of them are produced at cruising altitudes high in the atmosphere. Scientific studies have shown that these high-altitude emissions have a more harmful climate impact because they trigger a series of chemical reactions and atmospheric effects that have a net warming effect. The IPCC, for example, has estimated that the climate impact of aircraft is two to four times greater than the effect of their carbon dioxide emissions alone."

https://davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can...limate-change/

The above is also why volcanic emissions can cause devastating climate effects if the plume reaches a high enough altitude. Oh, and how the ozone hole formed.

I mean, none of this is wrong, but even bearing that in mind it still only accounts for a small percentage of climate change. That's not to say there aren't other environmental impacts but those aren't one hundred percent relevant to our conversation.

The IPCC has estimated that aviation is responsible for around 3.5 percent of anthropogenic climate change, a figure which includes both CO2 and non-CO2 induced effects. The IPCC has produced scenarios estimating what this figure could be in 2050. The central case estimate is that aviation's contribution could grow to five percent of the total contribution by 2050 if action is not taken to tackle these emissions, though the highest scenario is 15 percent.[20] Moreover, if other industries achieve significant cuts in their own greenhouse gas emissions, aviation's share as a proportion of the remaining emissions could also rise.

I am not suggesting that aviation is immune from our need to challenge climate change, but rather, that the pressure to 'not fly' is largely not going to make any difference and serves only to assist the notion that activists are 'people who are obviously enjoying luxuries they're asking you to give up' and so on. It creates an additional burden on people trying to fight climate change by demanding they exist apart from the world's current structure or else they don't 'really believe'. It's the same nonsense that was said about Al Gore twenty years ago, and its the same nonsense ow. It's why Greta Thunberg has to take a boat to make a point, because if she doesn't, people will rant about how she obviously doesn't believe her own 'propaganda'. And then they rant about her anyway.

Of the list of things we actually need to deal with, aviation is way down on the list, and moreover, things that will have a greater impact will also reduce the need to fly. Building a state of the art, national high speed rail system and mass transit infratructure in the USA for example.

[Celgress]

I mean, none of this is wrong, but even bearing that in mind it still only accounts for a small percentage of climate change -- which means, even if that math doesn't take its greater impact into accoumt, it adds up to just four and eight percent of emission impact. ....

It still isn't as simple as percentages because of where the particles end up and the chemical reactions they cause because of said atmospheric layer placement, but I digress.

[Celgress]

...He was kicked out of the Naval Reserve for testing positive for cocaine.

Awareness of his drug problem isn't an alt-right thing.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-...est-1413499657

https://www.cnn.com/2014/10/16/polit...avy/index.html

What does this have to do with an alleged business deal regarding a gas plant in Ukraine and its possible impact on Obama Era foreign policy? That is the rumor I was referencing.

[Tendrin]

It still isn't as simple as percentages because of where the particles end up and the chemical reactions they cause because of said atmospheric layer placement, but I digress.

Bear in mind that the percentage I gave includes /non-co2/ induced effects, which I would /believe/ covers that. Again: having an outsized impact is one thing, but on the whole, it remains a drop in the bucket compared to the coal fired power plants operating world wide. That's the scale of the problem.

[Tami]

Seven freshman Democrats: These allegations are a threat to all we have sworn to protect

Reps. Gil Cisneros of California, Jason Crow of Colorado, Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Elaine Luria of Virginia, Mikie Sherrill of New Jersey, Elissa Slotkin of Michigan and Abigail Spanberger of Virginia are all freshman Democrats.

Our lives have been defined by national service. We are not career politicians. We are veterans of the military and of the nation’s defense and intelligence agencies. Our service is rooted in the defense of our country on the front lines of national security.

We have devoted our lives to the service and security of our country, and throughout our careers, we have sworn oaths to defend the Constitution of the United States many times over. Now, we join as a unified group to uphold that oath as we enter uncharted waters and face unprecedented allegations against President Trump.

The president of the United States may have used his position to pressure a foreign country into investigating a political opponent, and he sought to use U.S. taxpayer dollars as leverage to do it. He allegedly sought to use the very security assistance dollars appropriated by Congress to create stability in the world, to help root out corruption and to protect our national security interests, for his own personal gain. These allegations are stunning, both in the national security threat they pose and the potential corruption they represent. We also know that on Sept. 9, the inspector general for the intelligence community notified Congress of a “credible” and “urgent” whistleblower complaint related to national security and potentially involving these allegations. Despite federal law requiring the disclosure of this complaint to Congress, the administration has blocked its release to Congress.