RNC 2020 Thread

I don't think you can possibly get enough of what you give . . .

 

You really shouldn't do that FlyDiddles . . . It promotes under-bite.

Besides, it must be much easier to to put your head in your ass the way you did it before.
​

.

​

 

Yeah, believe what Trump tells you not your lying eyes.

 

"When someone is President, everything that happens in the country is their responsiblity".
- Donald Trump, 2014, when Obama was President

 

Steve Pendlebury
8h
·
The only constructive thing I can say about Day 4 of the Republican National Convention is that Donald Trump sent a clear message last night.
The message didn’t come in the words of his way-too-long acceptance speech, delivered in a weird, bored-sounding cadence – small clumps of meaningless verbiage trailing off at the end of each sentence. If you watched even a little bit of the convention this week, you’d already heard every one of those talking points. Side note: If you need four straight nights of speeches by Black folks assuring America that you’re really not a racist, yoooou might be a racist. (Apologies to Jeff Foxworthy.)
The message was the event itself; the Hatch Act-busting campaign rally at the place Trump shamelessly reminded us is “known all over the world as the People’s House” and over-the-top, late-night fireworks display spelling out the candidate’s name over the Washington monument. Remember, the justification for doing the speech at the White House was that holding a big event somewhere else would be too risky in the midst of the deadliest pandemic in a century. Yet more than a thousand unscreened, unmasked MAGA death cultists crammed together on the South Lawn for hours last night to feed the ego of their Dear Leader.
The message was the same as the one delivered by every anti-mask crybaby who’s thrown a tantrum in a store, spraying saliva all over bystanders while braying about tyranny and oppression.
This was Trump’s message: My fellow Americans – Fuck you. Rules don’t apply to me. I’ll do whatever I want. I don’t care who I hurt doing it.
To put things in perspective, the crowd at Trump’s speech last night represented roughly the number of people in America killed by COVID-19 yesterday. The number of lives lost to the virus during the four days of the RNC was higher than the 9/11 death toll. Trump didn’t cause the coronavirus, but his lack of leadership has made the pandemic far deadlier than it had to be.
Who’s going to be the next Herman Cain? Who’s going to die as a tribute to Trump? Make no mistake, it’s somebody who was in the crowd last night. Asked about the danger of holding a potential super-spreader event, a senior White House official told CNN last night: “Everybody is going to catch this thing eventually.”
More than 180,000 dead in less than half a year. So… four more years, right?
The best thing about Trump’s speech is that it marked the end of the Republican convention. We have to make sure it also marks the beginning of the end of his presidency. I doubt that anything we heard or saw this week has won over anyone who wasn’t already going to vote for four more years of Trump’s madness. And although the debates could be interesting as pure spectacle, I don’t expect them to sway anyone. If you’re undecided at this point in the contest, where the hell have you been for the last four years?
The conventions are over. Let’s get on with it. Register and vote – as early and as safely as you can. America is so much better than Donald Trump. Let’s send that clear message by voting him out in a landslide.

 

Alright, let's do this.

Subjective if this is good, but sure, I'll give you this one.

The USMCA is notably similar to NAFTA, with only minor economic impact expected and the changes that were made were mostly "cosmetic." We have somewhat better access to Canadian dairy is the biggest change.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2018/10/02/5-things-to-know-about-usmca-the-new-nafta/

I know you're a climate change denier, but if you would listen to science you'd realize many of the regulations cut for manufacturing are extremely detrimental in the long run.

Actually, you can thank Obama for this one:

Kind of, it's actually still in effect, it's just a $0 penalty. The issue here is if you're against the individual mandate, this makes it easy to reverse by future congresses.

Again, you can thank Obama for that. I don't personally thank him, but if you're into that it was continuation of Obama era (notoriously tough on illegal immigration) that has stifled it.

How was this good? They were abiding by the terms of the deal according to international inspection agencies. Then when we pulled out they started breaking the terms of the deal and working towards nuclear armament without restrictions.

I disagree, but sure, it's subjective so you can have this one too.

Kinda downplays the role of the rest of the world and it remains to be seen what will happen to the remaining members. Usually they join a new militia. Truly, the war on terrorism is nearly as futile as the war on drugs.

Kinda vague, what transgressions specifically are you referring to? Economic issues, South China Sea conflicts? How did Trump let them know we won't tolerate it and what was the result of it?​

 

The most laughable/sad part of the entire RNC fright-fest, and there were many, was the "Communist China Virus" on everybody's lips.

Since when does a virus have a nationality or a political party affiliation? So transparently lame.

 

Okay, time for some more analysis . . . I'm numbering each of the bulleted responses, so as to easily track our discussion going forward. My originally listed Trump-achievements in blue, followed by your replies in red, followed by my own version in black.

1. Replaced scores of revisionist judges with constitutional purists Your reply . . . Subjective if this is good, but sure, I'll give you this one. Trust me . . . it is good. Judges do not make laws . . . they may only apply them.
2. Replaced NAFTA The USMCA is notably similar to NAFTA, with only minor economic impact expected and the changes that were made were mostly "cosmetic." We have somewhat better access to Canadian dairy is the biggest change. . . . https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2018/10/02/5-things-to-know-about-usmca-the-new-nafta/ USMCA imposes requirements for labor reform and compliance with regulations not previously burdening Canadian and Mexican manufacturers, forces Canada to opened its previously restrictive market to US dairy and poultry products, and eliminates the requirement for US companies to store data on servers in Mexico and Canada if they manufacture there.
3. Reduced obstacles to manufacturing in America I know you're a climate change denier, but if you would listen to science you'd realize many of the regulations cut for manufacturing are extremely detrimental in the long run . . . (referenced graphic above). I don't deny that the climate changes . . . it's doing so constantly, whether the temperature is going up or down, whether rainfall increases or decreases, whether wind patterns change or not, it's all climate change, and the climates cannot be held constant. I'm really interested in seeing Ben Gregory's method of data analysis and the breadth of the data supporting his plotted temperature history over time. Given that samples pre-dating modern science would be both crudely measured and sparse, I think conclusions drawn from whatever method he came up with can be considered specious. As far as I know, any data that is referenced before the invention of the thermometer (1700's) cannot be relied upon as absolutely accurate . . . Still, I agree that some of the rolled back regulations could have helped the environment if left in place, and some not. Moreover, Trump himself indicated that some of these rollbacks were needed to deliver temporary relief to an underemployed nation, and that the environment can be focused upon again when we are once again a stronger nation (than we were when Obama / Biden left office).
4. Made America energy independent Actually, you can thank Obama for this one: . . . (referenced graphic above). You'd have us believe that Obama was responsible for the enormous increase in natural gas production and the resultant drop in price? Nice try, but I attribute it to fracking.
5. Eliminated Obama's onerous individual mandate penalty Kind of, it's actually still in effect, it's just a $0 penalty. The issue here is if you're against the individual mandate, this makes it easy to reverse by future congresses. A win's a win. This was a beneficial Trump achievement.
6. Stifled illegal immigration Again, you can thank Obama for that. I don't personally thank him, but if you're into that it was continuation of Obama era (notoriously tough on illegal immigration) that has stifled it . . . (referenced graphic above). That Pew Research data is unreliable. There are millions of illegal immigrants in this country that avoid participating in the census and other surveys, out of fear of deportation.
7. Withdrew from the Iran Deal How was this good? They were abiding by the terms of the deal according to international inspection agencies. Then when we pulled out they started breaking the terms of the deal and working towards nuclear armament without restrictions. Iran was not complying with the deal, as they were test launching long range ballistic missiles in clear violation of the agreement. EU nations would not force Iran's hand on the issue, and Trump decided that an acquiescent EU was not going to be a good partner in holding Iran to its commitments. He did the right thing. Withdrawing the US from the deal put pressure on the EU to be the first line of defense, instead of sitting back while letting the US carry the big stick.
8. Slowed North Korean progress on nuclear development, testing and proliferation North Korea is stepping up missile tests . . . (referenced graphic above). Certainly not like they were when Obama / Biden were in office. In fact, this year (not shown), NK has launched only 2 missiles. Even if you attribute that small number to an interruption due to the COVID crisis, up until that time, that was only on pace for 8-10 missiles for the entire year.
9. Restored defense funding to an appropriate level I disagree, but sure, it's subjective so you can have this one too. As it should be.
10. Substantially dismantled ISIS Kinda downplays the role of the rest of the world and it remains to be seen what will happen to the remaining members. Usually they join a new militia. Truly, the war on terrorism is nearly as futile as the war on drugs. Much of the world pretty much "downplayed" their roles on their own, either not joining the coalition at all, or by making token non-combat contributions, leaving the task largely to the USA.
11. Let China know we'll no longer tolerate their transgressions Kinda vague, what transgressions specifically are you referring to? Economic issues, South China Sea conflicts? How did Trump let them know we won't tolerate it and what was the result of it? Some of China's decades-old trade advantages surrounded pegging the Yuan to the USD, the imposition of technology transfer requirements on companies basing manufacturing operations in China, ignoring the theft of US intellectual property by Chinese concerns, and unfair government subsidies of China-based manufacturers in breaking into US markets. While Trump has not yet secured all of the concessions he sought from China, he has won the IP and tech transfer battles, secured a commitment that China will increase its annual purchases of US goods by 50%, all while signaling China that existing tariffs will remain in place until they agree to the remaining concessions.

Gee, in retrospect maybe I should have listed Trump's achievements in red and your replies in blue . . .

 

Promised made, promises lied about.

 

I'll just get into a few of these this time.

Energy independence: if you won't attribute it to Obama, there's no reason to call it a Trump victory either. Fair? We did become a net exporter under Obama afterall.

Climate change: Ben Gregory is just a reddit user, but I've attached the paper he got the data from below. In a word, Paleoclimatology.

Immigration: Even if we do assume the numbers are inaccurate for the reasons you described, there's still a downward trend through Obama's term. There's no reason to think the proportions reporting would get smaller.

Iran deal: I'm not understanding. Independent inspectors said they were mostly following regulations, but they stopped after we quit the deal. If anything, they are still in an accelerated state now.

NK: we looking at the same graph? Clearly they did many more missle tests under Trump. I also don't think it's fair to extrapolate pre-covid data across the year. The tests are sporadic, not paced out. For all we know they had another 50 ready to go in June before covid hit. That's an extreme example, but it illustrates the point.

Defense spending: I still think it's a bit absurd...


China: I'd like to see some data or expert analysis backing up the results or expected results of these policies.



Edit: can't attach the paper, too large. When did the file upload limit become 1mb? Anyway, here's the link to the paper:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6675609/#__ffn_sectitle

 

Oh Bull Crap.

You couldn't be uplifted by a conservative message it included a cure for all cancers.

 

But you want to shut down fracking despite the fact that it resulted in the energy independence. Energy independence occurred in spite of Obama, not because of him. He was totally dishonest about supporting the Trans American Pipeline until he formally came out against it. If the Democrats get their way, we will be begging the Arabs for oil again.

The problem with the Iran deal was that they could still be build the bomb with what was in place. In the mean time Obama sent millions of dollars to the Iranians IN CASH so that they could continue to fund terrorism.

Are you dumb enough to believe the numbers from China? Yes, I know, they are a communist country and you like communists and socialists because their system is “fairer and better.” Do you trust the words from Putin? The only reason why his military spending might not be higher, is that his economy is not large enough to support it.

As for the German, Britain, Japan and South Korean numbers, part of that is due to the fact that we have subsidized their defense which is part of the “big red bar” you dislike so much. One of Trump’s policies has been to get these countries to pay their fair share for their defense.

 

Not if it was your cancer.

 

They hate fracking.... Until it costs five bucks a gallon to fill their tank..... At which point it will be Trumps fault.

 

I don't like fracking, but Obama was infamously supportive of it (at least infamously with the liberals). It seems better than traditional fossil fuels, but I feel we can do better. Forbes article on it:


7,348 views|Dec 31, 2019,01:06pm EST
President Obama’s Support For America’s Shale Oil And Natural Gas
Jude ClementeContributor
Energy
I cover oil, gas, power, LNG markets, linking to human development.


Former U.S. President Barack Obama gesture as he[+]
ASSOCIATED PRESS

“The natural gas boom has led to cleaner power, and greater energy independence….Natural gas isn’t just appearing magically…. We’re encouraging it and working with the industry,” Barack Obama, 44th President of the United States.

Lest we forget that the great U.S. shale oil and natural gas revolution started around 2008, right when Barack Obama took office for the first of his two terms as U.S. President. As seen in the figure below, the uptick in gas production and usage under his watch was immense. And really out of nowhere the U.S. is the largest oil and gas producer ever. Emerging as the world’s go-to fuel, from 2008-2016, gas increased its share of U.S. power generation – its main sector for use – from 21% to 33%, mostly at the expense of coal.

· Under President Obama, U.S. gas production increased 35%.

· Under President Obama, U.S. gas consumption increased 19%.

Under President Obama, U.S. crude oil production increased 80%.


The shale boom in the Obama years was beyond what[+]
DATA SOURCE: EIA; JTC

In particular, President Obama supported natural gas as an essential strategy to cut greenhouse gas emissions by displacing coal and also backing up intermittent wind and solar power.

Gas emits 50% less CO2 than coal and has few local criteria pollutants to clear hazy city skies.

President Obama was right, and the International Energy Agency has specifically credited U.S. shale as the primary reason why we have been cutting CO2 faster than any other nation in “energy history.”

U.S. CO2 emissions are at their lowest levels in a generation, mostly thanks to more natural gas, even over renewables as reported by the U.S. Department of Energy.

As such, we are already on pace to easily meet our Paris climate commitments years early, even though the Trump administration is now pulling the country out of the pact.

Importantly, this absolute drop of emissions from using more gas to generate electricity is in stark contrast to other sectors of the U.S. economy that confront flat emissions.

Further, the industry has been slashing methane emissions as well, in order to capture lost product and maintain a sustainability factor that favors gas over other fossil fuels.

States and producers will continue making important progress toward addressing the methane issue, irrespective of near-term federal policy.

And because fracking has made natural gas — a feedstock fuel for manufacturing — cheap and plentiful, U.S. industrial electricity costs are 35-60% lower than those of foreign competitors, and our home prices are just a third of those in Europe.

The growing anti-fracking positions for shale oil and gas from his party, however, are the opposite of what the Obama administration promoted.

Not surprisingly, a recent U.S. Chamber of Commerce report indicated just how devastating a fracking ban would be for us.

Released on December 19, a report from its Global Energy Institute projects “catastrophic” economic impacts of proposed fracking bans. Plummeting tax revenues, lost jobs, a worsening trade deficit, and skyrocketing energy prices would become the norm.

· ”Our analysis shows that if such a ban were imposed in 2021, by 2025 it would eliminate 19 million jobs and reduce U.S. Gross Domestic Product by $7.1 trillion.

· Natural gas prices would leap by 324 percent, causing household energy bills to more than quadruple. By 2025, motorists would pay twice as much at the pump for gasoline as oil prices spike to $130 per barrel.

· Cost-of-living impacts to residential consumers in Wisconsin and Michigan would grow by approximately $4,700 and $5,100 respectively between 2021 and 2025.”

A fracking ban would “devastate” the economies of major oil and gas producing states, such as New Mexico, Texas, Ohio, Colorado, and Pennsylvania.

Many of these are battleground states for the 2020 presidential election, so candidates should learn from history: “Hillary Clinton’s Mistake On Fracking For Natural Gas.”

Just take gasoline, an indispensible oil product that we use 410 million gallons of a day.

The Chamber’s report has U.S. prices at just $2.21 per gallon, compared to a devastating $5.24 in Europe.

Such low energy prices mean more money in your pocket.

Other sectors are quietly expanding as well thanks to fracking for shale: “The U.S. Natural Gas Boom Is Fueling A Global Plastics Boom.”

With fracking accounting for about 80% of our domestic oil and gas supply, and basically all new production, a ban would surely leave us dangerously reliant on foreign energy sources once more.

This would be a shame since: “The U.S. Oil Boom Is Sinking OPEC Imports.”

Given how much oil and gas we will consume, there would be a very painful day of reckoning point should we ban fracking: much of today’s rhetoric will violently collide with a wall of reality.

You should know that oil and gas are still expected to supply the bulk of our energy for decades to come, according to U.S. Department of Energy estimates.

A fracking ban would also crush our allies that want to leverage U.S. energy to buffer Vladimir Putin and OPEC, becoming more coordinated in their goal of global domination of such irreplaceable fuels.

The IEA has the U.S. supplying 85% of new crude in 35% of new gas through the 2020s, and we could become the largest exporter of both before 2024.

President Obama was also pro-LNG exports, with the domestic industry really beginning during his last year as president, when Cheniere Energy’s Sabine Pass facility started shipments in February 2016.

In fact, shale and accompanying export have been strongly supported by both the Obama and Trump administrations: “LNG Exports – A Rare Case of Policy Continuity From Obama to Trump.”

Further, it was President Obama in December 2015 who signed a bill into law to end the ban on U.S. crude exports.

In an energy short world where six in every seven humans struggle in still developing countries, exporting really is a moral imperative: “COP21 Means More Natural Gas and the U.S. Must Help.”

It is very telling that those U.S. states that our pushing for a “renewables only” approach actually use a ton of gas.

In 2018, for instance, gas generated nearly 70% of the power in Massachusetts, 50% in California, and 40% in New York.

To illustrate what can happen, an already embattled electricity sector in California, holding power rates 50% above the national average, has been warned about even worse capacity shortages and less reliability as it seeks to shut down natural gas plants prematurely.

Indeed, President Obama taught us that a mainstream, practical path to a secure, reliable, affordable, and clean energy system is our only way forward