POLITICS Democratic Nominee 2020 Lollapalooza

Fareed Zakaria speaking some truth on Bernie....

Sanders’s energy proposals, in particular, look suspect: The US reduced carbon emissions under President Obama thanks (in part) to a transition from coal-fired power plants to natural gas, Fareed writes—but Sanders opposes both natural gas and nuclear power (another low-emission source) and would seek to end the use of each within five and 10 years, respectively.

“The Sanders green energy ‘plan’ is based on magical thinking,” Fareed writes. “It presumes that we can reduce emissions in electricity and transport to zero in 10 years while simultaneously shutting down the only two low-emission, always-available sources of power that together provide nearly 60 percent of our country’s electricity. And that makes me wonder: Is the real problem that Sanders will lose—or that he might win?”​

 

Well, well.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...Hillary-Clinton-running-mate-say-sources.html

 

Ha. He will be dead within a week of office and she will take over. Gonna be incredible.

 

Can she please please please just go away.

 

President Stop-and-Frisk with VP SuperPredators sounds like just the cure this country needs

 

been thinking about this since posted it. I think it is ambitious, but there is this assumption that natural gas/nuclear are the answer. Natural gas is a transitional technology. it isn't a coal replacement unless we are conceding on sustainability.

 

It is a transition fuel (I wouldn’t say technology really) that has pushed coal out due to its affordability and reduced emissions due to its better carbon efficiency. But a transition fuel because it isn’t an end. It isn’t an end due to carbon but also simply due to price. Hybrid solar/wind + battery systems will replace it on cost alone.

However losing 20% of our electricity generation and the best baseload we have in nuclear over ten years while passing out gas over just 5 (or vice versa if I have flipped those timelines) is fantasy. If you want to see an economy falter, triple (under the best of circumstances, in reality deploying millions of MWhrs of batteries over such a short period would also cause their price to skyrocket during this massive demand period meaning even higher marginal costs) the energy price due to forcing a move to batteries artificially sooner than the marginal cost curve would pull them in - while simultaneously removing thermal heat from industry (its gas and maybe nuclear in a 2050 scenario without gas for most companies). It is honestly inconceivable to transition from natural gas in 5 years. And while we could turn off nuclear - it’s also inconceivable to do so without gas there to replace it.

Texas is one of the biggest spots for wind there is. It’s great if you pull your power from where the wind blows. But it isn’t just cyclical in a day, it is also seasonal. My company is a large industrial owner of wind power and I’ve seen our own data. Parts of the year we get 40% less generation than others. This means we either need massively oversized fields or long-term storage (quick dispatching batteries is one thing, long-term storage is another). Areas with pumped hydro have been successful bridging that gap - but that’s not an option in Texas. So we need other technologies - or just go with solar. But over-reliance on solar creates a massive problem today without batteries. So batteries must come first. That isn’t a 5-10 year option - not on the scale needed for this vision.

So, yeah, I reject the plan.

 

Bloomberg seems to be proposing using Logan's Run as a healthcare model. Eff this guy, he's no progressive. He would trade in money death panels for calendar ones.

 

What?

 

It's almost sad watching Biden in public. Dude can't tell you where he shit last.

 

Thank goodness Ukraine got involved and saved us from him

 

When asked, he should just answer, "Depends".

 

I know you think you are very clever with this, but you are fundamentally ignorant to what that whole episode was about. Ukraine didn't get involved, Trump attempted to leverage aid to get them to announce an investigation against him.

Trump perceived him as his likely opponent. he said so repeatedly. Do you think Trump was dumb to do so? I never have believed Biden would get the nomination. Am I smart to think so?

your smugly repeated remark on this is wildly off target with what transpired, as to be a complete revision of reality. I wish I had your confidence, I do admire that about you.

 

Here we go. Insult crew is back. Stopped reading after being called ignorant, but I'll repeat, thank goodness my man Trump and ukraine got involved and made Biden make a fool of himself repeatedly.

 

What did Ukraine do?

 

I know.

 

FOX HAS BEEN “MORE FAIR”: WHY BERNIE’S TEAM HAS HAD IT WITH MSNBC

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/202...e-fair-why-bernies-team-has-had-it-with-msnbc

 

I’m sure Fox would be quite happy with Trump v Sanders

 

Nothing. Just as russia had nothing to do with Hillary losing. Trump didnt need to dig up dirt on a guy like Biden to win an election and the thought process that he did has never made sense.

 

He's still decidedly behind Biden in polling. He certainly may have needed Ulraine to help him get elected. I doubt we'll find out since it's looking bleak for Uncle Joe without a big Super Tuesday.