Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Max™]

It's worth noticing that the only people not worried by Trump talking about illegitimate or stolen elections, are Trump and his groupies, that's really dangerous shit to be spreading around.

Makes me wonder though how human muscle power rates on the CO2 efficiency scale. I think burning coal or fossil fuel might actually be less polluting per kW produced. Our respiratory system is not terribly efficient.

Checked on this recently, we emit between 0.5 and 1 kg of CO2 per day for the most part, or 1~2 Teratonnes per year for all humans, but CO2 is something we exhale which the biosphere depends on, that precludes it being pollution.

This site did list a reasonable fuel efficiency calculation though: http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2011/ph240/maher1/ getting a value of ~12.5 MPG, but then they list ~9.1 MPG for bicycles, which is definitely crap, bikes are ridiculously efficient uses of energy.

[smjjames]

Yeah, while there are definetly those who will blow off steam over losing, we haven't had anybody like Trump actively pushing the whole 'election is rigged' thing and riling up those people who think the election really is rigged.

The whole allegations feels like a timebomb of N strength waiting to go off. Maybe nothing will come of it, but it's about as unpredictable as the whole election has been.

Quick question: Are these elections being more insane than usual (not in terms of candidates, I know the answer there) or not?

Where have you been since last year? lol

In all seriousness, it's definetly crazier than usual, at least in comparison to since 2000, in part due to Trump.

[mainiac]

The election is pretty normal other then the candidates.  But Trump utterly defines this election so that's like saying besides the elephant, the room is empty.

[mainiac]

Not really that unusual.

[smjjames]

Well, I was thinking public reaction. You know, the aforementioned GOP office being burned, the Brit that went over with the express intention of murdering Trump etc.

That attempted assassination was back over the summer. There's always going to be some nutters, but yeah, I don't recall a GOP or Democrat office being firebombed since in recent elections (since 2000 at least).

[RedKing]

Quick question: Are these elections being more insane than usual (not in terms of candidates, I know the answer there) or not?

Yes. In a number of metrics.

1) Undecided and third party voters at this stage of the election is abnormally high (about 15%, compared to 5% at this stage in 2012).
2) Number of swing states is huge compared to any elections in recent history.
3) You have drastically asymmetrical ground games: Clinton has a solid organization, if smaller than Obama's in 2008; Trump has three guys in a phone booth with a case of beer.
4) You have a major party where roughly half the party establishment is disavowing their candidate 3 weeks out from the general election.


And that's without getting into the fact that you have Trump pushing the "they stole the election before we voted" and "half the planet is a vast left-wing conspiracy to stop me" and "Clinton should be drug-tested, I think she was on drugs during the debate" and....yeah, you get the idea. It's not just the candidates that are insane, it's the rhetoric surrounding them. Though that does feel something like an incremental uptick after Palin's shit in 2008. 2012 was a relatively return to normalcy and decency compared to 2008 and 2016.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Here's looking at you, Mittens.

Also, the runner-up of the Republican primary was the Zodiac Killer.

[mainiac]

You have a major party where roughly half the party establishment is disavowing their candidate 3 weeks out from the general election.

I was under the impression that it is way, way less then half.

[Frumple]

Eh, quite a few have been talking shit about trump. Most of those are still saying they endorse him. Would say it kinda' depends on what you consider disavowed, I guess. Half's probably still hyperbolish, but... less so, if you're talking everything except the actual endorsement.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

A lot of the ones not withdrawing endorsement are pulling a weaker version of what Pence is trying to do: ignore that they have no consensus of opinion with Donald Trump and try to take an approach that won't crash them out of politics in the likelihood that he loses or the possibility that something even worse than what's already gone down enters the public sphere.

Personally, I think the disavowing Republicans have the right of it. It's obvious why everybody would be afraid to give themselves a record of going against the party, but just look at Mittens, he barely did badly and was lambasted as a RINO evermore. I think that if they get asked why they didn't endorse the party's nominee after all is said and done "because it was Donald Fucking Trump!" will be an accepted answer.

[Max™]

Oh god, I saw someone talk about wishing we had Mitt Romney again, and Armok help me... I can't think of a reason it is wrong.

As awful as he seemed at the time, holy shit, at least he wasn't a self-contradicting whackjob talking about the election being fraudulent less than a month before it was over.

[smjjames]

Though that does feel something like an incremental uptick after Palin's shit in 2008. 2012 was a relatively return to normalcy and decency compared to 2008 and 2016.

Palin's shit seems really mild compared to Trump's shit. She's a sweet but ignorant/naive derpanoid compared to Trump.

The two really aren't comparable, I mean, they aren't even on the same level of shittyness.

The democratic debates (all 20 something of them I believe) were definetly gruelling due to the huge number. And then the DNC massively overcompensated for 2016 and set up too few debates.

[smjjames]

You have a major party where roughly half the party establishment is disavowing their candidate 3 weeks out from the general election.

I was under the impression that it is way, way less then half.

Maybe if you're counting those still in office, yes. Theres quite a few of those who aren't in office or running for office or don't have a job that depends on endorsing the party candidate who have disavowed the candidate.

[alway]

Given Trump still has over 42% support nationwide, you need to seriously gerrymander the republican party to say anywhere near half don't support him.

[smjjames]

Given Trump still has over 42% support nationwide, you need to seriously gerrymander the republican party to say anywhere near half don't support him.

RedKing said party establishment, not the voters themselves.