-
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
@pakman said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
@pakman said in US Politics:
@Frank said in US Politics:
@Paekakboyz said in US Politics:
@Frank are those swing states places where that industry is a big deal? or do you think swing state voters will think it's anti-business/growth/jobs etc?
Not sure.
I just know Biden's current attempts to deny he was against fracking earlier means banning fracking polls very badly in the swing states (particularly Pennsylvania)
The fact that Democrats can't/won't moderate their woke liberal leanings to take the moderate middle, which is so obviously there for the taking, was always likely to resurface.
Biden fading in home straight.
How is fracking “woke” or “liberal”?
It’s a science/environment issue.
It’s plain it’s not inherently woke or liberal, but anti-fracking is a widely held view by such types.
It’s not purely a science/environment issue: it’s also economic. Most of the glib climate change promises are not economically viable. For them to be so requires technology which currently doesn’t exist. And of course, without China playing ball it’s all rather futile.
At core, Biden is pushing ‘moral’ causes even if the costs fall on the less fortunate.
It’s very decent, but his apparent indifference to the economic impact on the electorate could be costly in the swing states.
I’d much rather socialise with Biden, but I think it’s going to go to the wire.
"Most of the glib climate change promises are not economically viable."
Doing nothing is not economically viable.
https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/financial-services/articles/insurance-companies-climate-change-risk.html
And if Fracking is a woke issue then so is being worried about earthquakes.
https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/does-fracking-cause-earthquakes?qt-news_science_products=0#qt-
"Most induced earthquakes are not directly caused by hydraulic fracturing (fracking). The recent increase in earthquakes in the central United States is primarily caused by disposal of waste fluids that are a byproduct of oil production."Kind of like saying most road fatalities are not directly caused by alcohol but by cars so why not drink and drive?
It's a complicated subject. At root the biggest problem with the most simplistic analyses is that a combination of increasing world population and greater economic prosperity in the third world means the world's energy requirement is set to increase strongly for the foreseeable future. There is simply no way to cope with that while decreasing reliance on hydrocarbon energy sources. The best bet would be nuclear, but that's obviously replete with its own problems.
Most of the carbon zero pledges involve some heroic assumptions, and as @winger has perhaps intimated, ignore the fact that reducing Western emissions whilst exporting manufacturing to Eastern countries ramping up massive amounts of coal production is not really achieving anything.
I'm not well informed on fracking, but somewhat skeptical that a few earthquakes in the middle of no where would be of much concern. Meanwhile, fracking has allowed the US to be oil self sufficient, which was a pretty good place to be when the price was 120 bucks a barrel.
Sensibly the West ought to be levying a steep carbon tax on dirty Eastern manufacturing, but guess what, polls suggest the populace doesn't want to pay the higher prices which would result.
I could go on.
-
Interesting stuff coming out Lord Ashcroft's US Election Focus Groups in Ohio & Georgia.
Key take is many people have yet to make up their mind, there appears to be lots of shy Trump voters and neither Trump or Biden are lighting people's fires.
-
@pakman said in US Politics:
Sensibly the West ought to be levying a steep carbon tax on dirty Eastern manufacturing, but guess what, polls suggest the populace doesn't want to pay the higher prices which would result.
Why take responsibility for the environment when it's thousands of miles away and you have politicians like Trump & Biden to blame?
-
@pakman
Fracking is highly dangerous for earthquakes (https://geographical.co.uk/opinion/item/3500-fracking-fuller), damage to the water table and methane, but also dangerous because of the lack of scientific verification on potential damages (https://www.tai.org.au/content/top-scientists-strongly-reject-fracking-inquiry-emissions-findings-call-again-ban-fracking)
But I'd like to look at this:
"Most of the carbon zero pledges involve some heroic assumptions, and as @winger has perhaps intimated, ignore the fact that reducing Western emissions whilst exporting manufacturing to Eastern countries ramping up massive amounts of coal production is not really achieving anything."
https://chinapower.csis.org/china-greenhouse-gas-emissions/China has made a concerted effort to reduce industrial emissions. In 2018, Beijing introduced an action plan that requires 480 million tons of carbon capacity from steel production to meet “ultra-low emission” standards by 2020. China is likewise upgrading its power grid with more efficient “ultra-supercritical” plants, which produce more energy with less coal. This push will raise standards well past those currently in place in the US. According to the Center for American Progress, by 2020, “**every coal plant operating in the United States would be illegal to operate in China**.”
But the real kicker (for Australia, who pretends they don't add to the problem despite exporting so much coal to China) is that China does not need them any more. Coal is being phased out in China with huge danger to Australia's economy:
https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/china-and-japan-see-the-future-and-it-s-not-coal-why-australia-will-be-stranded-20190816-p52hr3.html -
-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
Interesting stuff coming out Lord Ashcroft's US Election Focus Groups in Ohio & Georgia.
Key take is many people have yet to make up their mind, there appears to be lots of shy Trump voters and neither Trump or Biden are lighting people's fires.
I'm still yet to be persuaded by a shy Trump supporter effect - some demographics may have been missed in the polls in 2016 and if anything they will be overcompensated for this time around.
It's pretty damning that no one on the republican side is talking in detail about a likely path from Trump here. At least last time the reporting was out there that Trump saw his path through the rustbelt and he campaigned there tireliessly - now it's all very general about "shy Trump supporters", "late surge" etc.
I found this reporting of the thoughts of Trump' campaign manager pretty interesting. None of the three paths he outlines seem likely.
In reporting out this story, Axios learned that Stepien has described to some colleagues that he sees at least three pathways to 270 electoral votes.
Stepien tells them the "easy part” is winning Ohio, Florida, Georgia, Iowa and Maine’s second congressional district. From there, the first pathway, and the one he views as most likely, is for Trump to win Arizona, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania.
His second pathway would be for Trump to win Arizona, North Carolina and Michigan.
And pathway three — the one Stepien views as least likely of the options — does not include Arizona but involves Trump winning North Carolina, Michigan and Nevada.
Those states are where Trump will be spending the vast bulk of his time between now and Nov. 3, and where the Trump campaign is spending most of its money.The states in none of Stepien's three scenarios: Wisconsin or Minnesota.I'm inclined to believe that the first path is the only realistic one and we are going to have same moment as 2016 fairly on in the count where we see where Pennsylvania is going and it will either be game over for Trump (and likely the 'easy part' of that equation likely hasn't come together either) or it will be a shit your pants moment for the Democrats because if Pennsylvania goes Trump there is no reason AZ, NC, MI, NV cannot as well.
-
I think there are shy Trump voters - just how many is the question.
Do polls take account of this?Trump is doing up to 4 big rallies per day right now. Leaving it all on the field.
If he wins, I wonder if the press will suddenly turn on Biden's work ethic. -
@nostrildamus said in US Politics:
But the real kicker (for Australia, who pretends they don't add to the problem despite exporting so much coal to China) is that China does not need them any more. Coal is being phased out in China with huge danger to Australia's economy: https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/china-and-japan-see-the-future-and-it-s-not-coal-why-australia-will-be-stranded-20190816-p52hr3.html
Pakman has linked to a good article re this pledge
But maybe China will convert their coal plants to Russian gas. But only if it works out cheaper taking (including storage just in case supply is cut off) into account conversion costs. Otherwise it won't be done
-
@Frank said in US Politics:
I think there are shy Trump voters - just how many is the question.
Do polls take account of this?Trump is doing up to 4 big rallies per day right now. Leaving it all on the field.
If he wins, I wonder if the press will suddenly turn on Biden's work ethic.Polls take account by having margins of error.
Those margins can be considerable and up to 5%.That is why the headline predictions that the polls show a huge loss to Trump aren’t necessary true. Not because the polls are incorrect but because the summaries aren’t taking the margin of error into account.
As I have explained earlier, the current polls show a small win to Biden if you only count states where he is polling over the margins. Not a massive one.
That also means that Trump can flip one reasonably sized State and win.
Conversely Trump is showing hardly any count locked in, however if all of those within the margins are hiding shy voters he could boost up to being within reach.
Biden is in the box seat according to polling but it could easily be a close thing.
Trump not only needs to flip something polling solidly for Biden but must take everything in the marginal zone. Lose one big one in that zone eg Florida and he is fucked. -
@Crucial said in US Politics:
Biden is in the box seat according to polling but it could easily be a close thing.
Polls. Wasn't Hillary certain of winning? Joe's a bit of a joke with scary policies. In a party full of control freak nutcases. I don't think he has a hope of winning.
-
-
@pakman I'm not going to subscribe to that mouthpiece of Murdoch.(https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/daily-telegraph/)
Murdoch hates China, it is personal.
But China is ramping up these market technologies, whether they meet the target or lie to the West (as is their wont) is yet to be seen. -
@Winger Nationalfile
Don't get me wrong if there was anything like this about Trump it would be leading news across every outlet..doesn't make it right to release though.The Hunter hookers drugs and toes is funny more than anything. Again if it were Don Jr it would be leading news across the globe. Will be interesting to see how this is supressed.
-
@Rembrandt
At this stage it is just a loser son doing meth and screwing hookers. Hope there's not worse stuff on there.And I don't believe for a second that there is anything wrong with a meth-head degenerate son using the family name, and suggesting at possible access to Joe Biden, travelling around the world setting up deals and raking in cash for the family. There is absolutely no possibility Joe Biden might just be a little dirty or compromised.
And while I am on the subject, I fully believe in the strongest most emphatic terms that if video evidence of Donald Trump Jnr or Eric Trump came out a few weeks before the election of either doing meth with hookers while it was known either was at the same time doing deals on the family name, the media would give this most despicable, salacious footage any airtime whatsoever. It would in no way be employed to reflect on President Trump.
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@Crucial said in US Politics:
Biden is in the box seat according to polling but it could easily be a close thing.
Polls. Wasn't Hillary certain of winning? Joe's a bit of a joke with scary policies. In a party full of control freak nutcases. I don't think he has a hope of winning.
Do you ever look at facts? I'm haven't been making stuff up out of thin air. These polls are what they are.
It has already been explained how these polls relate to the Hillary ones.Yes, at the moment, a fair portion of the media are taking a simplistic view and saying that Biden has it easily. Just as they did with Clinton last time. The problem is that they aren't looking at the actual positions and margins of error.
If you did a count on every state with a poll result for Biden the election would be 338-198How you can equate that to 'no hope of winning' is beyond logic.
What I have been consistently saying is that while Biden is in the box seat, if you read the polls properly, Trump has 'a hope'. It is slim, but not impossible or out of the realms of possibility.
-
@Frank they are in the white house in important roles, and part of the sitting presidents inner circle. That's an important distinction imo. If Biden snr has been doing illegal stuff then they should go hard. Hunter falls in that wider sphere of yuck to illegal behavior that seems to run rife through political families and associates.
-
@Frank said in US Politics:
@Crucial
Crucial are there any polls turning current numbers & margins for error into %age chances of winning for each candidate ?Not entirely sure what you mean. The poll results are mostly binary ie they present a result of who wins.
Each one will state a margin of error based on their own methods but the FT tracker uses 5% (quite high) as a margin of to close to call.Edit: they do split out between solid, leaning and tossup if that’s of use. Solid is a strong constant 10% plus margin , leaning is 5-10, toss up is under 5.
Biden has 279 solid and leaning. Trump has 125.
Those numbers settled about 3 weeks ago. The toss up states are a moving feast. -
@Paekakboyz said in US Politics:
@Frank they are in the white house in important roles, and part of the sitting presidents inner circle. That's an important distinction imo. If Biden snr has been doing illegal stuff then they should go hard. Hunter falls in that wider sphere of yuck to illegal behavior that seems to run rife through political families and associates.
Looks like Joe was taking a cut, so relevant for the election.
Pay for access, very Clinton-esque.
US Politics